ArticlePloS one2021
Patient preferences for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices: Wrist-type or arm-type?
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Correlation of Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure in Measuring Blood Pressure Using Validated Digital Wrist Monitor Versus Validated Digital Arm Monitor: Study in a Real-World Setting.International journal of hypertension · 2026Article
- Comparing the accuracy of continuous blood pressure monitoring using wearable cuffless devices with conventional 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: A systematic review and meta-analysis.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAmbulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is important in evaluating average 24-hour blood pressure (BP) levels, circadian rhythm, sleeping BP and BP variability but many patients are reluctant to use standard ABPM devices.
methodsWe compared two validated ABPM devices, the BPro tonometric wrist monitor and the A&D TM-2430 oscillometric upper arm monitor, for agreement of recordings and acceptability in 37 hypertensive patients (aged 55±9 years).
resultsSuccessful BP measurements were less frequent with the wrist-type than the arm-type device during the sleeping (66.3% vs. 92.9%, P <0.01) and awake periods (56.2% vs. 86.5%, P <0.01). Comparable paired readings showed no significant difference in systolic BP but diastolic BP (DBP) values were higher with the wrist compared to the arm monitor (24-hour 89±13 vs. 85±14 mmHg, P <0.01) with similar differences awake and sleeping. Bland-Altman analysis showed some large discrepancies between individual arm and wrist monitor measurements. More patients found the wrist monitor more comfortable to use than the arm monitor.
conclusionsDespite the difference in individual BP measurements and the systematic overestimation of DBP values with the BPro device, wrist monitors with good patient acceptability may be useful to facilitate ABPM in some patients to provide additional information about cardiovascular risk and response to antihypertensive therapies.
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.