ArticlePulse (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Blood Pressure during Blood Collection and the Implication for Absolute Cardiovascular Risk Assessment.
Article in Pulse (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBlood collection and blood pressure (BP) measurements are routinely performed during the same consultation to assess absolute cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. This study aimed to determine the effect of blood collection on BP and subsequent calculation of the absolute CVD risk.
methodsForty-five participants aged 58 ± 9 years (53% male) had systolic BP (SBP) measured using clinical guideline methods (clinic SBP). Then, on a separate visit, BP was measured immediately before, during, and after blood collection. Absolute CVD risk scores were calculated (Framingham equation) using SBP from each measurement condition and compared.
resultsThe prevalence of low (<10%), moderate (10-15%), and high (≥15%) absolute CVD risks among the participants was 67%, 22%, and 11%, respectively, using clinic SBP. SBP values before and during blood collection were significantly higher compared to values after blood collection (130 ± 18 and 132 ± 19 vs. 126 ± 18 mm Hg;
conclusionAbsolute CVD risk calculation is not affected by use of SBP measurements recorded at the time of blood collection. Therefore, it is acceptable to collect blood and measure BP during the same consultation for absolute CVD risk assessment.
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.