ArticlePloS one2018
Discrepancy between invasive and non-invasive blood pressure readings in extremely preterm infants in the first four weeks of life.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-Invasive Blood Pressure Measurement in Extremely Preterm Neonates: Comparative Analysis of Different Methods.Indian pediatrics · 2025Article
- Artificial and human intelligence for early identification of neonatal sepsis.Pediatric research · 2023Review
- Blood Pressure in Critically Ill Children: Exploratory Analyses of Concurrent Invasive and Noninvasive Measurements.Critical care explorations · 2021Article
- Echocardiographic assessment of hemodynamic changes in preterm neonates with shock: a prospective pragmatic cohort study.European journal of pediatrics · 2020Article
- Continuous vital sign analysis for predicting and preventing neonatal diseases in the twenty-first century: big data to the forefront.Pediatric research · 2020Review
- Heart Rate Variability in the Perinatal Period: A Critical and Conceptual Review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe agreement between invasive and non-invasive blood pressure (BP) readings in the first days of life of preterm infants is contentiously debated.
objectiveTo compare mean, systolic and diastolic invasive (IBP) and non-invasive BP (NBP) readings obtained during routine care in the first four weeks of life of extremely preterm infants.
methodsWe extracted pairs of IBP and NBP readings obtained from preterm infants born below 28 weeks of gestation from the local database. After exclusion of erroneous measurements, we investigated the repeated measures correlation and analyzed the agreement (bias) and precision adjusted for multiple measurements per individual.
resultsAmong 335 pairs of IBP and NBP readings obtained from 128 patients, we found correlation coefficients >0.65 for mean, systolic and diastolic BP values. The bias for mean BP readings was -0.4 mmHg (SD 6.1), for systolic BP readings 6.2 mmHg (SD 8.1), and for diastolic BP readings -4.3 mmHg (SD 6.5). Overestimation of systolic IBP and underestimation of diastolic IBP by the non-invasive measurement were found both in the group with gestational age from 23 to 25.9 weeks and in the group with gestational age from 26 to 27.9 weeks. Systolic NBP readings tended to exceed invasive readings in the range <50 mmHg (bias 9.9 mmHg) whereas diastolic NBP readings were lower than invasive values particularly in the range >30 mmHg (bias -5.5 mmHg).
conclusionThe disagreement between invasive and non-invasive BP readings in infants extends to the first four weeks of life. Biases differ for mean, systolic and diastolic BP values. Our observation implies that they may depend on the range of the blood pressure. Awareness of these biases and preemptive concomitant use of IBP and NPB readings may contribute to reducing over- or under-treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.