ReviewJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2022
Standardized home blood pressure monitoring: Rationale behind the 722 protocol.
Review 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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Home Blood Pressure Phenotypes and Cardiovascular Remodeling in Hemodialysis.Kidney international reports · 2026Article
- Investigating feature-engineered predictors for systolic blood pressure changes in an mHealth-based disease management program.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Article
- Renal Denervation in Asia: 2025 Asia Renal Denervation Consortium (ARDeC) Consensus Statement Endorsed by the Hypertension Cardiovascular Outcome Prevention and Evidence in Asia (HOPE Asia) Network.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2026Review
- Urgent Notification Intervention of Home Blood Pressure in Cohort Studies of the Tohoku Medical Megabank Project.JMA journal · 2024Article
- Standardized home blood pressure monitoring: Rationale behind the 722 protocol.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 10 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Home blood pressure (HBP) has been recognized as a prognostic predictor for cardiovascular events, and integrated into the diagnosis and management of hypertension. With increasing accessibility of oscillometric blood pressure devices, HBP monitoring is easy to perform, more likely to obtain reliable estimation of blood pressures, and feasible to document long-term blood pressure variations, compared to office and ambulatory blood pressures. To obtain reliable HBP estimates, a standardized HBP monitoring protocol is essential. A consensus regarding the optimal duration and frequency of HBP monitoring is yet to be established. Based on the current evidence, the "722" protocol, which stands for two measurements on one occasion, two occasions a day (morning and evening), and over a consecutive of 7 days, is most commonly used in clinical studies and recommended in relevant guidelines and consensus documents. HBP monitoring based on the "722" protocol fulfills the minimal requirement of blood pressure measurements to achieve agreement of blood pressure classifications defined by office blood pressures and to predict cardiovascular risks. In the Taiwan HBP consensus, the frequency of repeating the "722" protocol of HBP monitoring according to different scenarios of hypertension management, from every 2 weeks to 3 months, is recommended. It is reasonable to conclude that the "722" protocol for HBP monitoring is clinically justified and can serve as a basis for standardized HBP monitoring.
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.