Evidence mapPaperPMID 39185008Full record

ArticleGlobal heart2024

Pilot Study of Intelligent Office Blood Pressure Measurement Model in Shanghai, China, 2022.

Guoli Wu, Qinghua Yan, Fernando Martínez-García, Dinesh Neupane, Yuheng Wang, Fei Wu, Cui Wu, Barbara Lee Smith, Yan Shi, Minna Cheng

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Global heart, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Guoli WuGlobal Health, Project HOPE, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0009-0004-5139-1563
Qinghua YanDivision of Non-communicable Diseases and Injury Control and Prevention, Shanghai Municipal Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0009-0003-5401-1266
Fernando Martínez-GarcíaInternal Medicine Department, Clinical Hospital of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8562-4477
Dinesh NeupaneDepartment of International Health, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1501-2990
Yuheng WangDivision of Non-communicable Diseases and Injury Control and Prevention, Shanghai Municipal Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Shanghai, China.
Fei WuDivision of Non-communicable Diseases and Injury Control and Prevention, Shanghai Municipal Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Shanghai, China.
Cui WuDepartment of Non-communicable Diseases Control and Prevention, Baoshan District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Shanghai, China.
Barbara Lee SmithGlobal Health, Project HOPE, Washington, DC, USA.
Yan ShiDivision of Non-communicable Diseases and Injury Control and Prevention, Shanghai Municipal Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2952-8565
Minna ChengDivision of Non-communicable Diseases and Injury Control and Prevention, Shanghai Municipal Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1270-6153

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: An intelligent office blood pressure measurement (IOBPM) model for community-based hypertension management was piloted in Shanghai, China, to overcome the conventional blood pressure management (CBPM) model's deficiencies. Methods: We selected adults aged 35-89 years who were being treated and managed for hypertension in two community health centers for the IOBPM and CBPM models. The IOBPM model consisted of two or three consecutive blood pressure (BP) measurements using a pre-programmed and validated automatic device. The BP data for the CBPM model were obtained from the routine follow-up records of hypertensive patients and derived from the Shanghai Non-communicable Diseases Management Information System. Subjects in the IOBPM model were selected by a simple random sampling method, and propensity score matching was used to select a comparable control population from the CBPM model based on important covariables. The BP levels, end-digit preferences, frequency distribution, and BP control were compared between the two models. Results: We selected 2,909 patients for the IOBPM model and 5,744 for the CBPM model. The systolic BP in the CBPM model was 12.3 mmHg lower than in the IOBPM model. In the CBPM model, there were statistically significant end-digit preferences ( Conclusion: The IOBPM model appears to overcome the deficiencies of the CBPM model, leading to more accurate and reliable BP measurements.

Indexed as

Blood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationHypertensionAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChinaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsBlood PressureCommunity Health CentersEnd-digitHypertensionManagement Information SystemsOffice Blood Pressure Measurement

Identifiers

PMID39185008
PMCPMC11342829

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.