ArticleSystematic reviews2025
Beyond global trueness and precision: evaluating the clinical suitability of automated brachial cuff blood pressure measurements in acute care-a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of aggregated and individual participant data.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInvasive intra-arterial blood pressure (IABP) monitoring using an arterial catheter carries both risks and practical limitations. Noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) monitoring using the widely adopted oscillometric automated brachial cuff is performed in nearly all patients in acute care settings at some point, yet its reliability remains in question. Conventional statistical approaches to assessing the global trueness (bias) and precision (standard deviation, SD) of NIBP compared to IABP may not fully capture the risk of harm posed by NIBP's measurement errors to patients, nor its ability to detect blood pressure (BP) values above or below critical thresholds. Moreover, risk factors for poor performance of NIBP warrant further investigation. We will perform a meta-analysis using individual participant data (IPD) to evaluate the clinical suitability of NIBP in acute care settings.
methodsWe will search the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and Scopus DISCUSSION: This meta-analysis will provide actionable insights to optimize BP monitoring strategies.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42021233707.
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.