ArticleJournal of human hypertension2023
Validation testing of five home blood pressure monitoring devices for the upper arm according to the ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 1:2020 protocol.
Article in Journal of human hypertension, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Combining HIIT with Small-Sided Soccer Games Enhances Cardiometabolic and Physical Fitness More Than Each Alone in Overweight Youth: A Randomized Controlled Study.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2025Trial
- Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a novel web-based physical activity intervention in adults with overweight/obesity: A pilot randomized controlled trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2023Trial
- IoT-based health monitoring and social welfare access for Thailand's older adults.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- User experience of a combined 2-in-1 home ECG and blood pressure monitor: a qualitative study.The British journal of cardiology · 2026Article
- Subcutaneous and continuous blood pressure monitoring in an ambulatory sheep by piezoelectric micromachined ultrasonic transducers.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2025Article
- Drinking Water NaCl Is Associated With Hypertension and Albuminuria: A Panel Study.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2025Article
- Recreational soccer and basketball improve anthropometric, body composition and health-related outcomes in overweight and obese young adults: A randomized multi-arm study.Biology of sport · 2025Article
- Article
- AI algorithm for personalized resource allocation and treatment of hemorrhage casualties.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Article
- Telemedicine and Digital Medicine in the Clinical Management of Hypertension and Hypertension-Related Cardiovascular Diseases: A Position Paper of the Italian Society of Arterial Hypertension (SIIA).High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2023Article
- Role of Point-of-Care Diagnostics in Lower- and Middle-Income Countries and Austere Environments.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
The accuracy of Omron 10 Series BP7450 (HEM-7342T-Z), Omron Platinum BP5450 (HEM-7343T-Z), Walmart Equate Premium 8000 Series UA-8000WM, Walgreens Premium 15+ WGNBPA-960BT, and CVS Series 800 BP3MW1-4YCVS were assessed in an adult general population compared to a mercury sphygmomanometer standard according to the ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 1:2020 validation procedure. Omron selected the monitors and included three non-Omron monitors because they were from large retail vendors in the United States and these monitors did not have accessible results from validation testing. The BP7450, N = 85, passed both criteria for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations between the test device and reference were 0.5 (7.7) and 2.5 (6.8) mm Hg. The BP5450, N = 86, passed both criteria. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 1.9 (7.0) and 3.6 (6.4) mm Hg. The UA-8000WM, N = 85, did not meet the first criterion for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 2.5 (8.0) and 5.1 (6.4) mm Hg. The WGNBPA-240BT, N = 85, did not meet the first criterion for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 7.9 (8.5) and 5.5 (6.7) mm Hg. The BP3MW1-4YCVS, N = 85, did not meet the first criterion for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 5.8 (8.7) and 3.1 (5.6) mm Hg. These findings emphasize the importance of verifying the validation status of home blood pressure monitors before use by consumers.
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.