ArticleJournal of hypertension2025
Accuracy of the smartphone blood pressure measurement solution OptiBP to track blood pressure changes in pregnant women.
Article in Journal of hypertension, 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.
- From Cuffs to Code: Machine Learning in Non-Invasive Blood Pressure Monitoring.Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine · 2026Review
- Hypertension in Women Across the Life Cycle: Unique Aspects and Challenges.Current hypertension reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHypertensive disorders present significant morbidity and mortality during pregnancy. Although ambulatory blood pressure measurement remains the standard of care for normotensive women, self-monitoring at home is increasingly prevalent. The widespread use of smartphones worldwide has sparked interest in mobile applications that leverage the built-in hardware for blood pressure estimation, yet few trials have assessed their accuracy.
methodsThis prospective, longitudinal and monocentric study evaluated the accuracy of the OptiBP algorithm against standard oscillometric blood pressure measurements in a sample of pregnant women. Patients scheduled for elective caesarean sections were enrolled during the preoperative anesthesia consultations. Paired blood pressure measurements using OptiBP and the reference method were obtained at multiple time-points in late pregnancy and the postpartum period. Agreement between methods was assessed using the AAMI/ESH/ISO 81060-2:2018 standard thresholds of 5 ± 8 mmHg for mean ± standard deviation of the error (criterion 1) and patient-specific standard deviation of the mean error (criterion 2) and represented graphically by Bland-Altman scatterplots.
resultsForty-eight women were enrolled of which 32 completed the protocol, yielding 338 total valid measurement pairs. Mean and standard deviation of the error were -1.78 ± 7.94 and 1.19 ± 7.59, and the patient-specific standard deviation of the mean error was 4.68 and 4.52, for SBP and DBP, respectively.
conclusionCompared with blood pressure measurements taken with an oscillometric device, OptiBP's blood pressure estimates meet the AAMI/ESH/ISO 81060-2:2018 criteria.
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.