ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
How Should We Measure and Deal with Office Blood Pressure in 2021?
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Untreated, uncontrolled and below-target hypertension in southern Africa: a population-based prevalence and care cascade assessment in rural Lesotho.BMJ global health · 2026Observational
- May Measurement Month 2022: an analysis of blood pressure screening results from Nepal.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Article
- Identification of potential biomarkers for hypertension based on transcriptomic analysis in rats.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Article
- Article
- Head-to-head comparison of the WHO STEPwise approach with immediate unattended and delayed unattended automated blood pressure measurements during household-based screening: a diagnostic accuracy study in Lesotho.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
- Hypertensive Heart Disease: A Narrative Review Series-Part 2: Macrostructural and Functional Abnormalities.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- A model for early failure prediction of blood pressure measurement devices in a stepped validation approach.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2022Article
- Comparability of a Blood-Pressure-Monitoring Smartphone Application with Conventional Measurements-A Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Effect of Amlodipine/Nebivolol combination therapy on central BP and PWV compared to Amlodipine/Valsartan combination therapy.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2022Article
- Understanding the Triple Burden of HIV, Noncommunicable Diseases, and Mental Health Conditions Among Female Sex Workers With HIV in the Dominican Republic.Journal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS CareArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Arterial hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease worldwide. Office blood pressure measurements (OBPMs) are still recommended for diagnosis and follow-up by all major guidelines; however, the recommended procedures differ significantly. In analogy, major outcome studies usually apply OBPMs, again, with a variety of procedures. This variety of OBPM procedures complicates the comparability between studies and challenges daily clinical practice. In this narrative review, we compile the most recent recommendations for office blood pressure measurement together with the major limitations and strategies and how these could be overcome.
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.