ArticleFederal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS2025
Assessment of Automated vs Conventional Blood Pressure Measurements in a Veterans Affairs Clinical Practice Setting.
Article in Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS, 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
Background: Automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurement devices that generate multiple measurements of an unattended patient are increasingly common but their efficacy in a veteran population has not been determined. This study evaluated the difference between automated and conventional BP measurements obtained during cardiology clinic visits at the West Palm Beach VA Medical Center (WPBVAMC). Methods: This retrospective review compared BP measurements taken in the WPBVAMC cardiology clinic between May 2017 and February 2019. Data were evaluated with descriptive statistics. Where appropriate, paired comparisons of continuous and binary variables were evaluated with the paired Results: AOBP and conventional office BP measurements for 95 patients were included. AOBP measurements were taken with the patient sitting alone in a clinic office or in the nursing triage area. The mean values of systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) were lower for the AOBP method vs the conventional office measurement method, with a difference of 14.6 mm Hg ( Conclusions: This analysis suggests that the use of AOBP may reduce misclassification of patients with hypertension, prevent unnecessary therapeutic interventions, and mitigate the white coat effect.
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.