Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40799351›Full record

ArticlePNAS nexus2025

Underestimation of systolic pressure in cuff-based blood pressure measurement.

Kate Bassil, Anurag Agarwal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PNAS nexus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

2 authors.

Kate BassilDepartment of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8113-4390
Anurag AgarwalDepartment of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0332-2166

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High blood pressure (hypertension) is the number one risk factor for premature death. Hypertension is asymptomatic, so blood pressure must be regularly monitored to diagnose it. In auscultatory blood pressure measurement, a patient's systolic (maximum) and diastolic (minimum) blood pressure are inferred from the pressure in an inflatable cuff wrapped around the arm. This technique is the gold standard against which all other noninvasive devices are validated. However, auscultatory measurements systematically underestimate systolic blood pressure and overestimate diastolic blood pressure. Overestimation is attributed to the increased cuff pressure needed to occlude the artery because of the surrounding tissue and arterial stiffness. In contrast, the cause of systolic underestimation, which leads to potentially a third of systolic hypertension cases being missed, has remained unclear. When the cuff is inflated beyond the systolic blood pressure, the blood flow to the vessels downstream of the cuff is cut off. The pressure in these downstream vessels drops to a low plateau. We have developed a novel experimental rig that shows that the low downstream pressure is the key cause of the underestimation of systolic blood pressure. The lower the downstream pressure, the greater the underestimation. Our results yield a simple physical model for the underestimation of systolic pressure in our rig and in the human body. Understanding the physics behind the underestimation of systolic blood pressure paves the way for developing strategies to mitigate this error.

Indexed as

arterial occlusionauscultatory methodblood pressuremeasurement inaccuracysystolic underestimation

Identifiers

PMID40799351
PMCPMC12343083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.