Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32729734›Full record

ArticleAnnals of medicine2021

Comparing oscillometric and tonometric methods to assess pulse wave velocity: a population-based study.

Rosaria Del Giorno, Chiara Troiani, Sofia Gabutti, Kevyn Stefanelli, Luca Gabutti

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Non-Hypertensive Effects of Aldosterone.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Vascular Health of Females with History of Assisted Reproductive Technology.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Rosaria Del GiornoDepartment of Internal Medicine, Clinical Research Unit, Regional Hospital of Bellinzona and Valli, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland.
Chiara TroianiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Clinical Research Unit, Regional Hospital of Bellinzona and Valli, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland.
Sofia GabuttiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Clinical Research Unit, Regional Hospital of Bellinzona and Valli, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland.
Kevyn StefanelliDepartment of Social Sciences and Economics, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Luca GabuttiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Clinical Research Unit, Regional Hospital of Bellinzona and Valli, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland.
Institute for Biomedicine · ITEnte Ospedaliero Cantonale · CHOspedale Regionale di Bellinzona e Valli · CHSapienza University of Rome · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOscillometric pulse wave velocity (o-PWV) represents an attractive, non invasive and non operator-dependent method to estimate arterial stiffness. Tonometric carotid-femoral measurements (cf-PWV),are considered the gold-standard for non-invasive aortic stiffness assessment. To date, no studies in the general population comparing the two methods have been performed. METHODS AND

results1162 subjects were analysed. O-PWV and cf-PWV showed a mean difference of -0.31 m/sec(

conclusionsOscillometric PWV estimates provide reliable values in the general population. An o-PWV tendency to underestimate arterial stiffness in younger subjects and in subjects with diseases known to increase arterial stiffness and to overestimate it with increasing age was found, even if scarcely relevant in clinical perspective. Overall the present findings underline an acceptable and satisfactory agreement between oscillometric and tonometric methods for the PWV assessment. KEY MESSAGES Oscillometric and tonometric PWV estimates showed a good and satisfactory agreement in the general population, above all in subjects without cardiovascular risk factors or a documented vascular damage. In comparison with tonometric values, oscillometric PWV estimates showed, however, the tendency to underestimate arterial stiffness in younger subjects and to overestimate it with increasing age, while diverging when diseases known to increase arterial stiffness are present. The magnitude of differences in PWV estimates between tonometric and oscillometric methods found in the general population appears most likely not to be significant in everyday clinical practice.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAge FactorsBlood PressureCarotid-Femoral Pulse Wave VelocityFemaleHeart Disease Risk FactorsHumansMaleManometryMiddle AgedOscillometryPulse Wave AnalysisReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentVascular StiffnessArterial stiffnesscomparative analysisoscillometric methodpulse wave velocitytonometric methodvascular ageing

Identifiers

PMID32729734
PMCPMC7877928
OpenAlexW3047020142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.