SynthesisHigh blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension2019
Attended Versus Unattended Automated Office Blood Pressure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Revisiting Unattended Versus Attended Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurements: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison Between Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurements and Manual Office Blood Pressure Measurements-Implications in Individual Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Current hypertension reports · 2021Pooled it
- Comparison of unattended, attended and routine clinic systolic blood pressure measurements and determinants of blood pressure difference between attended and unattended BP.Journal of human hypertension · 2026Trial
- Blood pressure measurement: Should technique define targets?Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2021Trial
- Sex Differences in the Usefulness of Unattended Blood Pressure Measurement in Patients with Arterial Hypertension.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2026Observational
- Haemodynamic changes from prepregnancy to very early pregnancy among women planning to conceive in Southwestern Uganda.Journal of hypertension · 2025Article
- Clinical Impact of 3- Vs. 5-Minute Delay and 30- Vs. 60-Second Intervals on Unattended Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurements.American journal of hypertension · 2025Article
- Comparison of nurse attended and unattended automated office blood pressure with conventional measurement techniques in clinical practice.Journal of human hypertension · 2022Article
- Current applications and limitations of European guidelines on blood pressure measurement: implications for clinical practice.Internal and emergency medicine · 2022Review
- Differences in the diagnosis of high blood pressure using unattended and attended automated office blood pressure.Journal of human hypertension · 2022Article
- Recent advances in managing primary hypertension.Faculty reviews · 2020Review
- Resistant hypertension-defining the scope of the problem.Progress in cardiovascular diseasesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAutomated office blood pressure (AOBP) has been proposed for blood pressure (BP) assessment in the office because it shows a strong association with the awake ambulatory BP. However, it remains unknown whether the presence or absence of an observer modulates AOBP readings.
aimTo determine the difference between unattended and attended AOBP measurements through systematic review and meta-analysis.
methodsWe searched the PubMed and the Cochrane Collaboration Library and we screened the references' list of relevant reports to identify potentially eligible articles. For included studies, quality was assessed by using the Quality Assessment for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2. The weighted pooled BP difference with 95% confidence interval (CI) between unattended and attended AOBP was estimated under the random effects model.
resultsTwelve studies (1762 subjects) were included. The systolic and diastolic BP difference between unattended and attended AOBP measurements was - 3.66 (- 6.58 to - 0.75) and - 1.67 (- 2.78 to - 0.55) mmHg, respectively. Heterogeneity across studies was high (I
conclusionsDue to the high heterogeneity, we cannot rely on the weighted pooled estimate. However, the available evidence suggests that attended AOBP yielded higher systolic and diastolic BP levels and it seems that the procedural methodology determines partially the statistical heterogeneity across studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31290085What 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.