Cited by 212Blood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring

Home Blood Pressure Measurement

Open access
Verberk, Willem J., Kroon, Abraham A., Kessels, Alfons G.H., de Leeuw, Peter W.·2005·Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to review the literature on home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) and to provide recommendations regarding HBPM assessment. Observational studies on HBPM, published after 1992, as identified by PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane literature searches were reviewed. Studies were selected if they met the following criteria: 1) self-measurements had been performed with validated devices; 2) measurement procedures were described in sufficient detail; and 3) papers clearly explained how final HBPM results were calculated upon which conclusions and/or treatment decisions were based. Office blood pressure measurement (OBPM) yields higher blood pressure values than HBPM. For systolic blood pressure, differences between OBPM and HBPM increase with age and the height of office pressure. Differences also tend to be greater in men than in women and greater in patients without than in those with antihypertensive treatment. Furthermore, HBPM can diagnose normotension with almost absolute certainty; it correlates better with target organ damage and cardiovascular mortality than OBPM, it enables prediction of sustained hypertension in patients with borderline hypertension, and it proves to be an appropriate tool for assessing drug efficacy. Despite some limitations and although more data are needed, HBPM is suitable for routine clinical practice.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.05.058

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 85 · Cited by 212

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Artigao LM, Llavador JJ, Puras A, et al. Evaluation and validation of Omron Hem 705 CP and Hem 706/711 monitors for self- measurement of blood pressure (in Spanish). Aten Primaria 2000;25: 96 -102.

Authors
Verberk, W. J., Kroon, A. A., Kessels, A. G. H., & de Leeuw, P. W.
Affiliations
Maastricht University Medical Centre (NL)
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-09
Volume
46
Issue
5
Pages
743-751
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1594167738
Cited by
212
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 10
FWCI
3.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Keywords
home blood pressure monitoring, office blood pressure measurement, hypertension diagnosis, borderline hypertension, target organ damage, cardiovascular mortality, antihypertensive efficacy, age and sex differences, normotension
MeSH terms
Home Care Services, Humans, Hypertension, Self Care, Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review