ArticleJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2022
Potential impact of systematic and random errors in blood pressure measurement on the prevalence of high office blood pressure in the United States.
Article in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Revisiting Unattended Versus Attended Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurements: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Pooled it
- Reliability and device objectivity in oscillatory blood pressure measurement - a measurement error analysis to inform clinical decision making.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Accuracy Assessment of a Wrist-Worn Oscillometric Blood Pressure Device Applied to the Upper Arm in Children.Cureus · 2026Article
- Curriculum Integration of an Interactive Blood Pressure Measurement Module to Improve Healthcare Students' Knowledge, Confidence, and Skills.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2026Article
- Machine learning predicts diabetes risk in high-risk populations: analysis of National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Hypertension Treatment According to 2017 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association Guidelines.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2025Article
- Biomarkers to Guide Medical Therapy in Primary Aldosteronism.Endocrine reviews · 2024Review
- Exploration of patients' practices related to home blood pressure monitoring.Journal of human hypertension · 2024Article
- Comparison of outcomes for routine versus American Heart Association-recommended technique for blood pressure measurement (CORRECT BP): a randomised cohort study.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
- International Consensus on Standardized Clinic Blood Pressure Measurement - A Call to Action.The American journal of medicine · 2023Article
- Global proliferation and clinical consequences of non-validated automated BP devices.Journal of human hypertension · 2023Review
- National Heart Center/Saudi Heart Association 2023 Guidelines on the Management of Hypertension.Journal of the Saudi Heart Association · 2023Article
- Potential impact of systematic and random errors in blood pressure measurement on the prevalence of high office blood pressure in the United States.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2022Article
- [HEARTS in the Americas: innovations for improving hypertension and cardiovascular disease risk management in primary careHEARTS nas Américas: inovações para melhorar a gestão do risco de hipertensão e de doenças cardiovasculares na atenção primária].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2022Article
- HEARTS in the Americas: innovations for improving hypertension and cardiovascular disease risk management in primary care.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The authors examined the proportion of US adults that would have their high blood pressure (BP) status changed if systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) were measured with systematic bias and/or random error versus following a standardized protocol. Data from the 2017-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES; n = 5176) were analyzed. BP was measured up to three times using a mercury sphygmomanometer by a trained physician following a standardized protocol and averaged. High BP was defined as SBP ≥130 mm Hg or DBP ≥80 mm Hg. Among US adults not taking antihypertensive medication, 32.0% (95%CI: 29.6%,34.4%) had high BP. If SBP and DBP were measured with systematic bias, 5 mm Hg for SBP and 3.5 mm Hg for DBP higher and lower than in NHANES, the proportion with high BP was estimated to be 44.4% (95%CI: 42.6%,46.2%) and 21.9% (95%CI 19.5%,24.4%). Among US adults taking antihypertensive medication, 60.6% (95%CI: 57.2%,63.9%) had high BP. If SBP and DBP were measured 5 and 3.5 mm Hg higher and lower than in NHANES, the proportion with high BP was estimated to be 71.8% (95%CI: 68.3%,75.0%) and 48.4% (95%CI: 44.6%,52.2%), respectively. If BP was measured with random error, with standard deviations of 15 mm Hg for SBP and 7 mm Hg for DBP, 21.4% (95%CI: 19.8%,23.0%) of US adults not taking antihypertensive medication and 20.5% (95%CI: 17.7%,23.3%) taking antihypertensive medication had their high BP status re-categorized. In conclusions, measuring BP with systematic or random errors may result in the misclassification of high BP for a substantial proportion of US adults.
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.