Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40434501›Full record

ReviewCurrent hypertension reports2025

Remote Blood Pressure Monitoring in Pregnancies at Risk of Developing Preeclampsia.

Theepika Rajkumar, Annemarie Hennessy, Angela Makris

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current hypertension reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

3 authors.

Theepika RajkumarSchool of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia. theepika.rajkumar@health.nsw.gov.au.
Annemarie HennessyUniversity of Sydney, Westmead, NSW, Australia.
Angela MakrisDepartment of Renal Medicine, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Warwick Farm, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis review examines the literature on remote blood pressure monitoring (RBPM) for pregnant women at high risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP). RECENT

findingsHypertensive disorders of pregnancy are a leading cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity. High risk women often require frequent outpatient review for blood pressure monitoring which can be resource-intensive. RBPM is an organised framework which allows patients to monitor their own blood pressure with clinician guidance, improving healthcare utilisation and potentially saving healthcare costs without worsening maternal and fetal outcomes. Following the COVID-19 pandemic and the growing research interest in mobile health, RBPM has been integrated into international guidelines for managing high-risk pregnancies. Yet there is significant heterogeneity across RBPM frameworks described in the literature, and a lack of clear guidance on the development and implementation of this strategy. RBPM offers promising additional surveillance for high-risk pregnant women. However, challenges remain in its safe implementation, including patient selection, technology, costs, and adequate training to ensure accuracy in blood pressure readings.

Indexed as

Blood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationBlood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryPre-EclampsiaCOVID-19FemaleHumansPregnancySARS-CoV-2TelemedicineHome blood pressure monitoringHypertensive disorders of pregnancyPreeclampsiaRemote blood pressure monitoringSelf-monitoring of blood pressure

Identifiers

PMID40434501
PMCPMC12119646

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.