Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34272985›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of pediatrics2022

Blood pressure measurement in pediatric population: comparison between automated oscillometric devices and mercury sphygmomanometers-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Keisyanne Araujo-Moura, Letícia Gabrielle Souza, Gabriele Luz Mello, Augusto César Ferreira De Moraes

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Keisyanne Araujo-MouraDepartment of Epidemiology, Graduate Program in Public Health and Graduate Program in Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, 01246-904, Brazil. keisyannemoura@usp.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1022-1950
Letícia Gabrielle SouzaDepartment of Epidemiology, Graduate Program in Public Health and Graduate Program in Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, 01246-904, Brazil.
Gabriele Luz MelloDepartment of Epidemiology, Graduate Program in Public Health and Graduate Program in Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, 01246-904, Brazil.
Augusto César Ferreira De MoraesDepartment of Epidemiology, Graduate Program in Public Health and Graduate Program in Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, 01246-904, Brazil.
Universidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the progressive elimination of mercury column devices for blood pressure (BP) measurement in children and adolescents, valid alternatives are needed. Oscillometric devices provide a replacement without mercury, are fully automated, and have excellent reliability among evaluators. Here, the goal was to test the accuracy of automatic blood pressure monitor devices compared to the mercury sphygmomanometer for BP measurement in children and adolescents. Electronic databases are EMBASE, MEDLINE (PubMed), SCOPUS, and Web of Science. We selected 8974 potentially eligible articles and two authors independently. We separately reviewed 370 full papers. Potentially eligible articles were selected according to the following criteria: (a) articles published in Portuguese, English, and Spanish; (b) screening of titles; (c) screening of abstracts; and (d) retrieval and screening of the full article to determine whether it met the inclusion criteria. We included 45 articles for analysis, 28 of which were selected for meta-analysis. The systolic BP measured by automatic blood pressure monitors presents 1.17 mmHg on average (95% CI 0.85; 1.48); for diastolic BP, it produced -0.08 mmHg (95% CI -0.69; 0.54) compared with a mercury sphygmomanometer. There is high heterogeneity between studies (> 90%) in the meta-analysis, partly explained by the device model, study environment, and observer training. Only articles that reported BP measurement by both methods were included.Conclusion: Automatic blood pressure monitors have strong measurement validity when compared with the mercury column. Thus, these can be safely used in blood pressure measurements of children and adolescents in clinical and epidemiological studies. What is Known: •The "gold standard" for indirect BP measurement is the mercury sphygmomanometer. •The accuracy of the automatic device is critical to any blood pressure measurement method. What is New: •Oscillometric or automatic devices can be a suitable alternative to auscultation for initial screening, consistent with current pediatric guidelines. •The automatic devices compared to the mercury column have a good validity of measurements, which can be used in blood pressure measurements of children and adolescents in clinical and epidemiological settings, provided that international protocols are followed.

Indexed as

HypertensionMercuryAdolescentBlood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationBlood Pressure MonitorsChildHumansReproducibility of ResultsSphygmomanometersMercuryBlood pressureHypertensionPediatric populationValidity

Identifiers

PMID34272985
OpenAlexW3180328179

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.