ArticleJournal of human hypertension2025
Blood pressure measurement technique in clinical practice in the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.
Article in Journal of human hypertension, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reliability and device objectivity in oscillatory blood pressure measurement - a measurement error analysis to inform clinical decision making.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
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
Blood pressure (BP) measurement is a common procedure conducted in various disciplines and is widely available on clinical reports. The diagnosis and management of hypertension require reliable measurement of BP in outpatient clinics. Published studies suggest the standardised method for BP measurement is difficult to apply in routine clinical practice. This study aimed to assess the current practice of BP measurement in outpatient clinics in relevant secondary care clinical specialties across the 15 separate hospital sites of the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde region (population 1.2 million) compared to the recommended standardised method. An online questionnaire was developed and disseminated to the supervising clinician of each of 268 regular outpatient clinics. The questionnaire focused on the standardised BP method (patient preparation, environment, and BP measurement technique). The questionnaire was returned for 110 clinics. 73 (66.4%) of the participating clinics measure BP routinely and these formed the basis for further analysis. 3 clinics (4.1%) apply all components of the standardised BP method. 5 (6.9%) clinics deliver advice to patients prior to clinic attendance on how to prepare for BP measurement. 61 (83.6%) of participating clinics have a dedicated quiet environment for BP measurement. 50 (68.5%) clinics always place the cuff on bare upper arm and 63.0% use a cuff size appropriate to upper arm circumference. In a wide range of secondary care out-patient clinic settings, we found that BP measurement rarely adheres to the recommended standards. This has important implications for the quality of treatment decisions that are based on BP measurement.
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.