ReviewClinical medicine (London, England)2026
How useful is a casual BP measurement?
Review in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cardiovascular disease: everybody's business.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Blood pressure (BP) varies continuously dependent on numerous personal and external factors as well as on the way it is measured and the methodology used. A casual BP reading may give some clues about a person's cardiovascular health, but risk can only be determined with repeated careful measurements. If high (≥140/90), systematic measurement following approved guidelines using a validated monitor is necessary, especially if the person is symptomatic and/or BP ≥180/120. A low casual BP (<90/60) should be similarly rechecked, especially if related symptoms are present. Despite the availability of guidelines for measuring BP, there is often poor compliance with these standards leading to less-than-ideal risk assessment. The lack of regulation of what BP home monitors are available to purchase, ignorance about how to measure BP accurately, the use of unvalidated monitors and of incorrect cuff sizes may lead to significant under- or over-assessment of BP with potentially avoidable consequences. Casual BP measurements, especially if elevated, need a systematic non-casual approach to remeasurement and interpretation.
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.