ArticleJournal of hypertension2026
Reassessing home blood pressure thresholds: clinical implications of lowering the diagnostic criteria to 130/80 mmHg.
Article in Journal of 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study investigated whether lowering the home blood pressure (BP) threshold for the diagnosis of hypertension from 135/85 to 130/80 mmHg enhances diagnostic accuracy when assessed against ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM).
methodsA total of 646 untreated participants (mean age 52 ± 10 years; 310 men) with valid 3-day office BP, 7-day home BP, and 24-h ABPM data and preserved renal function were included. Hypertension phenotypes were classified as normotension, white-coat, masked, and sustained hypertension according to office BP and ABPM criteria.
resultsLowering the home BP threshold increased sensitivity from 72.3 to 89.5% but reduced specificity from 81.8 to 69.1%, thereby improving overall diagnostic accuracy from 73.1 to 87.8% and the kappa coefficient from 0.238 to 0.427. At the conventional threshold of 135/85 mmHg, 63.2% of masked and 15.1% of sustained hypertension were misclassified as normotension, whereas these rates declined to 30.3 and 3.4%, respectively, at the 130/80 mmHg threshold. Individuals with home BP between 130/80 and 134/84 mmHg showed intermediate office and ambulatory BP values, with a high prevalence of masked (32.9%) and sustained hypertension (11.7%). Within this subgroup, isolated nighttime and daytime-nighttime hypertension were identified in 35.7 and 13.5% of participants, respectively.
conclusionThe conventional home BP threshold of 135/85 mmHg may fail to identify a considerable proportion of masked, sustained, and nighttime hypertension. Lowering the threshold to 130/80 mmHg, or designating 130/80-134/84 mmHg as a diagnostic 'gray zone' warranting ABPM confirmation, may improve diagnostic precision and facilitate earlier detection of hypertension in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.