ArticleClinical hypertension2026
Real-world performance of a ring-type cuffless blood pressure device compared with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.
Article in Clinical 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cuffless blood pressure (BP) monitoring devices are convenient alternatives to conventional ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). We evaluated the real-world agreement between a ring-type cuffless BP device (continuous ambulatory ring-type blood pressure monitor, CART BP pro) and ABPM and identified the clinical and physiological factors associated with measurement discrepancies. Methods: This real-world observational study included 154 adults (mean age, 62.1 ± 14.2 years; 41.6% men) who underwent simultaneous 24-hour ABPM and CART BP pro after exclusion of predefined clinical conditions and insufficient recordings. CART BP pro measurements were calibrated at baseline to ABPM in the contralateral arm. BP values from the 2 devices were compared for 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime periods, as well as for the classification of nocturnal hypertension and dipping status. Predictors of close systolic agreement (|24-hour systolic blood pressure [SBP] difference| ≤ 5 mmHg) were identified using multivariable logistic regression. Results: CART BP pro-derived period summaries were lower than ABPM for systolic BP (-7.1 mmHg for 24-hour SBP) and showed a modest positive bias for diastolic BP. Only 33.1% of measurements met the ≤ 5 mmHg accuracy criterion. Daytime SBP showed a similar bias (-7.8 mmHg), whereas nighttime SBP differences were smaller (-1.7 mmHg). By contrast, diastolic BP was consistently higher with the CART BP pro, particularly at night (+4.8 mmHg). Older age, male sex, lower body mass index, and higher heart rate independently predicted a closer systolic agreement. The agreement for nocturnal hypertension was moderate (κ = 0.516), with an overall concordance of 76.0%. However, dipping concordance was limited, with the CART BP pro showing blunted nocturnal dipping compared with ABPM (mean, 3.7% vs. 7.8%). Conclusions: This exploratory, real-world study found that CART BP pro-derived period summaries showed lower SBP values and smaller nocturnal BP declines than ABPM. Because period-level aggregates were compared rather than simultaneous point-to-point measurements, these findings should not be interpreted as a formal accuracy validation of the device. Further studies are needed to establish device-specific diagnostic thresholds and prospectively validate the clinical interpretation of CART BP pro-derived period summaries for hypertension diagnosis and circadian BP phenotyping.
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.