SynthesisPediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany)2026
Accuracy of validated blood pressure measuring devices for out-of-office measurement in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a cuff size prediction model for pediatric blood pressure measurement outside the office.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBlood pressure (BP) measuring devices must demonstrate clinical accuracy proven by proper validation testing in the intended population, following recommendations published by scientific organizations.
objectivesThis review aims to evaluate out-of-office validated BP measuring devices in children and adolescents and discuss their accuracy based on current validation standards. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Only successful, validated studies for out-of-office BP measuring devices were included. Studies for office blood pressure measuring (OBPM) devices or devices that failed validation were excluded. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS
methodsBased on the eligibility criteria, 17 validation studies on BP measuring devices were included, 8 for home blood pressure measurement (HBPM), and 9 for ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM). The accuracy of validated devices and the quality of the eligible studies were evaluated using the AAMI/ESH/ISO Universal Standard (ISO 81060-2:2018). DATA SOURCES: The systematic search was conducted through three search engines (PubMed, Scopus, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials)).
resultsWhen assessing on AAMI/ESH/ISO 2018 validation criterion 1, HBPM devices showed significantly lower accuracy than ABPM devices, in terms of absolute mean difference (MD, in mmHg) for systolic blood pressure (SBP) (1.35, 95%CI: 0.21 to 2.50, P = 0.023). Meta-analysis results using signed values showed no significant difference (ABPM: -0.49 mmHg, 95%CI: -1.40 to 0.41; HBPM: 1.34 mmHg, 95%CI: -0.55 to 3.24; P = 0.086). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses showed high heterogeneity (I LIMITATIONS: The primary limitation was the lack of separate reporting for the pediatric population concerning the parameters used in the validation process. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY
findingsFew BP devices are validated for out-of-office use in the pediatric population, with ABPM devices showing higher accuracy than HBPM devices. Compliance with pediatric-specific validation recommendations should be encouraged to ensure the accuracy of these devices in the pediatric population, while manufacturer-independent, systematic validation studies are needed. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO ID-CRD42025643559.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41307680What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.