Evidence mapPaperPMID 33452580Full record

SynthesisCurrent hypertension reports2021

Comparison Between Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurements and Manual Office Blood Pressure Measurements-Implications in Individual Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Yacong Bo, Kin-On Kwok, Kareen Ka-Yin Chu, Eppie Yu-Han Leung, Chun Pong Yu, Samuel Yeung-Shan Wong, Eric Kam-Pui Lee

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current hypertension reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Yacong BoJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Kin-On KwokJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Kareen Ka-Yin ChuDepartment of Continuing Education, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Eppie Yu-Han LeungJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Chun Pong YuLi Ping Medical Library, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Samuel Yeung-Shan WongJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Eric Kam-Pui LeeJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China. lkp032@cuhk.edu.hk.ORCID 0000-0001-8267-9384
Chinese University of Hong Kong · HKUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewAutomated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurements may provide more accurate estimation of blood pressure (BP) than manual office blood pressure (MOBP) measurements. This systematic review investigated the diagnostic performance of AOBP and MOBP using ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) as reference. Several databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and China Academic Journals were searched. Data were extracted, double-checked by two investigators, and were analysed using a random effects model. RECENT

findingsA total of 26 observational studies were included. The mean systolic/diastolic BP obtained by AOBP was not significantly different from that obtained by ABPM. The sensitivity and specificity of AOBP to detect elevated BP were approximately 70%. Fewer participants had white-coat hypertension on AOBP measurement than on MOBP measurement (7% versus 14%); however, about 13% had masked hypertension on AOBP measurement. The width of the limit of agreement comparing (i) AOBP and ABPM and (ii) MOBP and ABPM was comparable. AOBP may reduce the rate of the observed white-coat effect but undermine masked hypertension. The current recommendation, however, is limited by the absence of high-quality studies and the high heterogeneity of our results. More high-quality studies using different AOBP machines and in different population are therefore needed.

Indexed as

HypertensionWhite Coat HypertensionBlood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationBlood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryChinaHumansAmbulatory blood pressure measurementAutomated office blood pressureManual office blood pressureMasked hypertensionMeta-analysisWhite-coat hypertension

Identifiers

PMID33452580
PMCPMC7810619
OpenAlexW3124444155

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.