ArticleScientific reports2026
Factors affecting hospital inpatient blood pressure measurement as ranked by a Delphi survey.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current guidelines do not address the appropriate technique for accurate inpatient blood pressure (BP) measurement. Outpatient data suggest that technique matters for accurate readings. Given the substantial impact of BP treatment decisions, this study explored the relative importance of various factors for accurate inpatient BP measurement. This was a ranking-type Delphi survey conducted in two stages. Stage 1 involved document ratification (single round) where an international panel of 9 hypertension experts reviewed and validated source documents relevant to BP measurement. Stage 2 involved variable ranking across three iterative rounds: Rounds 1 and 2 required panellists to independently rank all 10 variables from most to least important with each variable receiving a unique rank; Round 3 used paired comparisons with forced choices to refine consensus. Binary decisions required > 80% agreement for consensus. Ranked order consensus required Kendall's coefficient > 0.7. The panel agreed with high consensus on the following 10 variables in order of importance: (1) at least two measurements, (2) correct cuff size, (3) not talking during measurement, (4) correctly fitted cuff, (5) cuff at heart level, (6) seated position, (7) contemporary device calibration, (8) legs uncrossed, (9) bare arm below cuff, and (10) supported back (Kendall's 0.97, P < 0.001). Understanding of true determinants of accurate inpatient BP measurement is still required. Meanwhile, expert consensus provides an intermediary step for prioritising factors in inpatient BP measurement to assess performance.
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.