Trial reportAmerican journal of hypertension2026
Testing Optical Character Recognition of Home Blood Pressure Measurements, a Randomized Trial.
Trial report in American journal of hypertension, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiagnosing hypertension typically requires repeated blood pressure (BP) readings taken over multiple days, but obtaining accurate BP measurements from patients at home is known to be challenging, at least in part due to failure to accurately report those measurements. Here, we evaluate 2 low-cost electronic reporting strategies, text messaging, and a novel image-based alternative, for acceptability and accuracy.
methodsWe developed and tested a 2-stage optical character recognition (OCR) model to "read" a BP monitor display from patient-provided cellphone photographs. We then conducted a crossover trial to test the accuracy and acceptability of image-based BP reporting with having patients report BP measurements by text messaging. We compared the response rates and values obtained from photo uploads to those from text messages.
resultsThe majority of the 50 respondents submitted most of the requested data. We received an average of 12/14 texted BP responses and 11.3/14 photo responses from participants. Only 4 participants sent neither text nor photo responses. In addition, our OCR model achieved 98.3% accuracy when "reading" BP values from images of sufficient quality (17.9% were rejected for quality issues), and the average BP reported by subjects did not differ between our text and image-based methods.
conclusionWe were able to successfully "read" BP values from photos of BP monitors sent by participants. Both text messaging and photo uploads of monitor displays appear to be accurate and acceptable approaches for collecting home BP readings.
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.