Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34599293›Full record

ArticleHypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension2021

Blood pressure variability assessed by office, home, and ambulatory measurements: comparison, agreement, and determinants.

Nadia Boubouchairopoulou, Angeliki Ntineri, Anastasios Kollias, Antonios Destounis, George S Stergiou

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Blood pressure variability in atrial fibrillation: separating prognostic signal from measurement noise.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Estimates of blood pressure variability obtained in different contexts are not interchangeable.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nadia BoubouchairopoulouHypertension Center STRIDE-7, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Third Department of Medicine, Sotiria Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Angeliki NtineriHypertension Center STRIDE-7, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Third Department of Medicine, Sotiria Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Anastasios KolliasHypertension Center STRIDE-7, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Third Department of Medicine, Sotiria Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Antonios DestounisHypertension Center STRIDE-7, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Third Department of Medicine, Sotiria Hospital, Athens, Greece.
George S StergiouHypertension Center STRIDE-7, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Third Department of Medicine, Sotiria Hospital, Athens, Greece. stergiougs@gmail.com.
Sotiria General Hospital · GRNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study compared the blood pressure variability (BPV) among office (OBP), home (HBP), and ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) measurements and assessed their determinants, as well as their agreement in identifying individuals with high BPV. Individuals attending a hypertension clinic had OBP measurements (2-3 visits) and underwent HBP monitoring (3-7 days, duplicate morning and evening measurements) and ABP monitoring (24 h, 20-min intervals). BPV was quantified using the standard deviation (SD), coefficient of variation (CV), and variability independent of the mean (VIM) using all BP readings obtained by each method. A total of 626 participants were analyzed (age 52.8 ± 12.0 years, 57.7% males, 33.1% treated). Systolic BPV was usually higher than diastolic BPV, and out-of-office BPV was higher than office BPV, with ambulatory BPV giving the highest values. BPV was higher in women than men, yet it was not different between untreated and treated individuals. Associations among BPV indices assessed using different measurement methods were weak (r 0.1-0.3) but were stronger between out-of-office BPV indices. The agreement between methods in detecting individuals with high BPV was low (30-40%) but was higher between out-of-office BPV indices. Older age was an independent determinant of increased OBP variability. Older age, female sex, smoking, and overweight/obesity were determinants of increased out-of-office BPV. These data suggest that BPV differs with different BP measurement methods, reflecting different pathophysiological phenomena, whereas the selection of the BPV index is less important. Office and out-of-office BP measurements appear to be complementary methods in assessing BPV.

Indexed as

Blood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryHypertensionAdultAgedBlood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedObesityOffice VisitsBlood pressure monitoringBlood pressure variabilityIndices

Identifiers

PMID34599293
OpenAlexW3203770661

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.