ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2025
Importance of Considering Temporal Variations in Pulse Wave Velocity for Accurate Blood Pressure Prediction.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancements and challenges in blood pressure monitoring using pulse wave propagation: a comprehensive review and ISO 81060-2 based statistical analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Review
- Recognition method for microgrid switching misoperations based on multi-source heterogeneous data fusion.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeContinuous, cuffless blood pressure (BP) monitoring devices based on measuring pulse wave velocity (PWV) or pulse transit time (PTT) are emerging but are often plagued by large prediction errors. A key issue is that these techniques typically rely on a single PWV value, assuming a linear response and small arterial wall deformations. However, arterial response to BP is inherently nonlinear, with PWV varying over time [PWV(t)] by up to 50% during a cardiac cycle. This study evaluates the impact of assuming a single PWV on BP prediction accuracy.
methodUsing a Fluid-structure Interaction (FSI) testbed, we simulate the radial and common carotid arteries with the Holzapfel-Gasser-Ogden (HGO) constitutive model to capture nonlinear arterial behavior under a pulsatile physiological blood flow. Pressure data from FSI simulation are used as the ground truth, while inner area A(t) and two PWV values, at diastole and systole, serve as inputs to BP prediction models. Two models are tested: one using a single PWV value, emulating existing PWV-based BP prediction methods; another using the two PWV values to account for PWV(t).
resultsThe single-PWV BP model produced prediction errors of 17.44 mmHg and 6.57 mmHg for the radial and carotid arteries, respectively. The model incorporating two PWV values reduced these errors by 90.6% and 96.8%, respectively.
conclusionRelying on a single PWV in BP prediction models can lead to significant errors. To improve BP accuracy, future efforts should focus on incorporating PWV(t), or at least both diastolic and systolic PWV values, into these models.
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.