Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38084029›Full record

ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2023

Comparison of Office Blood Pressure, Automated Unattended Office Blood Pressure, Home Blood Pressure, and 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurements.

Byung Jin Kim, Sung Ho Lee, Mi Yeon Lee, Seung Jae Lee, Hyo In Choi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Byung Jin KimDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. bjjake.kim@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9008-8506
Sung Ho LeeDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1018-7871
Mi Yeon LeeDivision of Biostatistics, Department of R&D Management, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2119-9226
Seung Jae LeeDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6553-9782
Hyo In ChoiDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6216-0873
Kangbuk Samsung Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough previous studies have reported differences of blood pressure (BP) according to BP measurement methods, studies in Korean population were scarce. This study aimed to compare BP differences according to different BP measurement methods and assess hypertension phenotype.

methodsThis prospective study recruited 183 individuals (mean 55.9 years; 51.4% males). The BP measurements included office BP (auscultatory attended office BP [ausAOBP], automated attended office BP [aAOBP], and automated unattended office BP [aUAOBP]) and out-of-office BP (home BP [HBP] and ambulatory BP [ABP]) measurements taken within one week of each other.

resultsThe mean systolic/diastolic BP differences between ausAOBP and other BPs according to different BP measurement methods were 3.5/2.3 mmHg for aAOBP; 6.1/2.9 mmHg for aUAOBP; 15.0/7.3 mmHg for daytime ABP; and 10.6/3.4 mmHg for average HBP. The increasing disparity between ausAOBP and other BPs in multivariable regression analysis was significantly associated with increasing BP. The prevalence of white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension in 107 individuals not taking antihypertensive medication was 25.4-26.8% and 30.6-33.3% based on ausAOBP, daytime ABP, and average HBP, respectively. The prevalence of white-coat uncontrolled hypertension and masked uncontrolled hypertension in 76 of those taking antihypertensive medication was 31.7-34.1% and 17.1-37.1%, respectively.

conclusionThis study showed a large disparity between office BP and out-of-office BP which became more pronounced when office BP by auscultation increased, suggesting that various BP measurement methods should be used to more accurately assess BP status.

Indexed as

Blood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryHypertensionAntihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureFemaleHumansMaleProspective StudiesAntihypertensive AgentsAmbulatory Blood Pressure MonitoringBlood PressureBlood Pressure Monitoring, SelfHome Blood Pressure

Identifiers

PMID38084029
PMCPMC10713445
OpenAlexW4389096661

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.