The DOI matches its Crossref record; 102 of the 109 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 51 of the 152 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques
Open accessAbstract
Current hypertension guidelines recommend using the average values of several blood pressure (BP) readings obtained both in and out of the office for the diagnosis and management of hypertension. In-office BP measurement using an upper-arm cuff constitutes the evidence-based reference method for current BP classification and treatment targets. However, out-of-office BP evaluation using 24 h ambulatory or home BP monitoring is recommended by all major medical associations for obtaining further insights into the BP profile of an individual and how it relates to their daily activities. Importantly, the highly variable nature of office and out-of-office BP readings has been widely acknowledged, including the association of BP variability with cardiovascular outcomes. However, to date, the implications of BP variability on cardiovascular outcomes have largely been ignored, with limited application in clinical practice. Novel cuffless wearable technologies might provide a detailed assessment of the 24 h BP profile and behaviour over weeks or months. These devices offer many advantages for researchers and patients compared with traditional BP monitors, but their accuracy and utility remain uncertain. In this Review, we outline and compare conventional and novel methods and techniques for assessing average BP levels and BP variability, and reflect on the utility and potential of these methods for improving the treatment and management of patients with hypertension.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
46 No full text of the sources · 27 Own interpretation · 20 Partly supported · 18 Supported · 7 Supported so far · 5 No basis given · 2 Sources not found · 1 Not supported · 1 Couldn’t confirm · accuracy not yet measured
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Current hypertension guidelines recommend using the average values of several blood pressure (BP) readings obtained both in and out of the office for the diagnosis and management of hypertension.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [5] Unger, T. et al. 2020 International Society of Hypertension Global Hypertension practice guidelines. Hypertension 75, 1334–1357 (2020). source
The Office BP Measurement protocol (p. 5) recommends taking three readings at a visit and averaging the last two. Table 5 (p. 6) specifies repeated home or ambulatory readings and uses average out-of-office BP for diagnosis; the Out-of-Office BP Measurement section (p. 6) also says these measurements inform diagnosis and treatment decisions. The guideline recommends out-of-office confirmation when possible, rather than requiring it in every case. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“a 5 mmHg difference in systolic BP would correspond to an incorrect classification of hypertension status in 84 million individuals worldwide15.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > The gold standard technique
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [15] Padwal, R. et al. Optimizing observer performance of clinic blood pressure measurement: a position statement from the Lancet Commission on Hypertension Group. J. Hypertens. 37, 1737–1745 (2019). source
The Introduction states that a 5-mmHg systolic BP measurement error could lead to incorrect hypertension classification in 84 million people worldwide. It presents this as an estimate based on an assumed global hypertension prevalence of 1.4 billion. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Accumulating evidence has highlighted the clinical relevance of BPV, beyond the effect of average BP levels on cardiovascular and mortality outcomes8”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [8] Stevens, S. L. et al. Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 354, i4098 (2016). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion conclusion states that long-term blood pressure variability is associated with cardiovascular and mortality outcomes beyond the effect of mean blood pressure. It also notes that evidence for cardiovascular outcomes from mid- and short-term variability needs further investigation, so the strongest support is for long-term variability. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“including the association of BP variability with cardiovascular outcomes”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [8] Stevens, S. L. et al. Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 354, i4098 (2016). source
The Discussion states that long-term blood pressure variability is significantly associated with cardiovascular events, stroke, and myocardial infarction independently of mean blood pressure. It also reports that the more limited evidence for mid- and short-term variability broadly supports an association with cardiovascular outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“An average of several office and out-of-office BP measurements is used to diagnose and manage hypertension.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [5] Unger, T. et al. 2020 International Society of Hypertension Global Hypertension practice guidelines. Hypertension 75, 1334–1357 (2020). source
The Office BP Measurement protocol (p. 5) recommends taking three readings per visit and averaging the last two; the diagnosis section (p. 4) usually calls for two to three visits. The out-of-office monitoring guidance (p. 6) uses multiple home or ambulatory readings and an average home BP for diagnosis and treatment decisions. The guidelines assess office and out-of-office readings separately, with out-of-office confirmation when feasible, rather than averaging them together. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“On a beat-to-beat basis, BP levels can vary markedly (from –24 mmHg to 33 mmHg) in response to usual extrinsic and behavioural factors4”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Introduction
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [4] Kallioinen, N., Hill, A., Horswill, M. S., Ward, H. E. & Watson, M. O. Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review. J. Hypertens. 35, 421–441 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Table 2 (Methods > Synthesis; page not provided) reports significant mean effects on systolic BP of −23.6 mmHg for acute alcohol use and +33 mmHg for bladder distension, matching the quoted endpoints after rounding. But these are effects measured across different studies and conditions, not beat-to-beat changes; the Results describe measurements taken minutes to hours after alcohol consumption. The source therefore supports the magnitude of effects from patient-related factors, but not the beat-to-beat characterization. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“To date, all major outcome clinical trials that evaluate the efficacy of pharmacotherapy in reducing BP levels have measured office BP levels using the upper-arm-cuff method13.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > The gold standard technique
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [13] Adler, A. et al. Pharmacological blood pressure lowering for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease across different levels of blood pressure: an individual participant-level data meta-analysis. Lancet 397, 1625–1636 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract Methods describes 48 randomised trials of blood-pressure-lowering drugs, and Methods > Statistical analysis uses their blood-pressure measurements. Neither passage specifies office measurement or an upper-arm cuff, and searches for those measurement methods found no passage establishing that all major outcome trials used them. (LLM, conf=0.72)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“This finding was confirmed in the SPRINT trial30, which demonstrated that the time spent within target BP levels was significantly associated with a decreased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, independent of average systolic BP levels.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > BP snapshots versus BP profile
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [30] Fatani, N., Dixon, D. L., Van Tassell, B. W., Fanikos, J. & Buckley, L. F. Systolic blood pressure time in target range and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with hypertension. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 77, 1290–1299 (2021). source
The Results report a significant association between greater time in target range and lower risk of a first major adverse cardiovascular event, including after adjustment for mean systolic blood pressure. The Methods identify this as a post-hoc analysis of SPRINT, rather than a finding from the original randomized comparison. (LLM, conf=0.94)
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Individuals who remained at target BP levels for a higher proportion of time seemed to have a lower risk of incident cardiovascular diseases, which was independent of the widely used office BP ‘control’ indicators29.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > BP snapshots versus BP profile
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [29] Chung, S. C. et al. Time spent at blood pressure target and the risk of death and cardiovascular diseases. PLoS ONE 13, e0202359 (2018). source
The Abstract’s Conclusion reports an inverse association between time at BP target and incident cardiovascular disease, independent of widely used BP-control indicators. The Discussion also says the association was independent of snapshot BP-control status and other management indicators. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The SAFAR study38,39 showed that in individuals with hypertension, 24 h central systolic BPV had a significant and a slightly stronger association with carotid damage and left ventricular structural and functional abnormalities than brachial BPV.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Central BP levels and variability
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [38] Yu, S. et al. 24-h aortic blood pressure variability showed a stronger association with carotid damage than 24-h brachial blood pressure variability: The SAFAR study. J. Clin. Hypertens. 20, 499–507 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Results §§3.2–3.3 report significant associations between 24-hour aortic systolic BP variability and carotid damage, with similar results in the hypertensive subgroup. The Discussion describes the aortic association as slightly stronger than the brachial association, but §3.2 says the difference was not statistically significant. This paper does not report an association with left ventricular structural or functional abnormalities. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [39] Chi, C. et al. Association of left ventricular structural and functional abnormalities with aortic and brachial blood pressure variability in hypertensive patients: the SAFAR study. J. Hum. Hypertens. 31, 633–639 (2017). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
- It may state two separate claims as one. 44
- Probably not a substantial claim. 15
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“Of note, although all types of BPV have a certain degree of clinical relevance and prognostic value, the association between the indices of different types of BPV, as well as their agreement in detecting individuals with high BPV, is moderate87,88.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Clinical implications of BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [87] Juhanoja, E. P., Niiranen, T. J., Johansson, J. K., Puukka, P. J. & Jula, A. M. Agreement between ambulatory, home, and office blood pressure variability. J. Hypertens. 34, 61–67 (2016). source
- Disputedcites [88] Boubouchairopoulou, N., Ntineri, A., Kollias, A., Destounis, A. & Stergiou, G. S. Blood pressure variability assessed by office, home, and ambulatory measurements: comparison, agreement, and determinants. Hypertens. Res. 44, 1617–1624 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report overall weak correlations between BPV indices measured by different methods and limited agreement (29–43%) in identifying people with high BPV. The Discussion likewise calls the correlations weak and the agreement limited, rather than moderate. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“out-of-office BP evaluation using 24 h ambulatory or home BP monitoring is recommended by all major medical associations for obtaining further insights into the BP profile of an individual and how it relates to their daily activities.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] Williams, B. et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension. J. Hypertens. 36, 1953–2041 (2018). source
- Partly supportedcites [44] Parati, G. et al. Home blood pressure monitoring: methodology, clinical relevance and practical application: a 2021 position paper by the Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability of the European Society of Hypertension. J. Hypertens. 39, 1742–1767 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The HOME vs. ABPM section (page unavailable) says current guidelines recommend home monitoring for evaluating suspected hypertension and describes ambulatory monitoring as capturing BP patterns across routine activities and sleep. It does not establish that all major medical associations make this recommendation, and its description of BP in relation to daily activities applies to ambulatory monitoring, not routine home monitoring. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“a standardized office BP measurement procedure is recommended by numerous guidelines5,6, which systematically addresses factors that contribute to BP fluctuations.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [5] Unger, T. et al. 2020 International Society of Hypertension Global Hypertension practice guidelines. Hypertension 75, 1334–1357 (2020). source
The Office BP Measurement section (p. 4) recommends following Table 3. Table 3 (p. 5) specifies a standardized procedure addressing conditions that can affect readings, including room temperature, recent smoking or caffeine, posture, cuff size, and repeated measurements. This paper is one of the guidelines cited, not evidence by itself for the number of guidelines. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The pharmacological treatment of hypertension has been hailed as arguably the most evidence-based and cost-effective medical intervention, with clear benefits of reduced morbidity and mortality14.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > The gold standard technique
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [14] Turnbull, F. Effects of different blood-pressure-lowering regimens on major cardiovascular events: results of prospectively-designed overviews of randomised trials. Lancet 362, 1527–1535 (2003). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Summary (p. 1) reports reduced major cardiovascular events, and the Total mortality section (p. 5) reports reduced deaths with ACE-inhibitor treatment versus placebo. The paper does not establish that hypertension treatment is the most evidence-based or cost-effective medical intervention; it also finds no clear mortality reduction for several other regimen comparisons. (LLM, conf=0.90)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“the highly variable nature of office and out-of-office BP readings has been widely acknowledged”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [4] Kallioinen, N., Hill, A., Horswill, M. S., Ward, H. E. & Watson, M. O. Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review. J. Hypertens. 35, 421–441 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (Conclusion and limitations) says clinical BP measurements can vary substantially and that a single reading may be substantially inaccurate. But the Methods explicitly limit the review to clinical settings and say it does not directly address home or 24-hour ambulatory monitoring. The claim is therefore supported for office readings, not specifically for out-of-office readings. (LLM, conf=0.90)
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“In-office BP measurement using an upper-arm cuff constitutes the evidence-based reference method for current BP classification and treatment targets.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [5] Unger, T. et al. 2020 International Society of Hypertension Global Hypertension practice guidelines. Hypertension 75, 1334–1357 (2020). source
Section 2 (p. 4) bases BP classification on office measurements, and the guideline labels its treatment goals as office BP targets (p. 10). The office-measurement recommendations specify a validated upper-arm cuff (p. 5). Office BP is the usual basis, not the only measure: the guideline also recommends out-of-office confirmation when possible (p. 4). (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [11] Whelton, P. K. et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Hypertension 71, e13–e115 (2018). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] Williams, B. et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension. J. Hypertens. 36, 1953–2041 (2018). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“this technique (nowadays incorporated into automatic oscillometric devices with a brachial cuff) remains the dominant BP assessment method and its data form the basis of recommendations by the WHO10 and clinical hypertension guidelines5,6,11,12.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > The gold standard technique
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [10] World Health Organization. WHO technical specifications for automated non-invasive blood pressure measuring devices with cuff. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/331749 (Geneva, 2020).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites [5] Unger, T. et al. 2020 International Society of Hypertension Global Hypertension practice guidelines. Hypertension 75, 1334–1357 (2020). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In Hypertension Diagnosis – Office BP Measurement (pp. 4–5), the guideline says office BP measurement is the most common basis for diagnosis and follow-up and recommends an electronic oscillometric upper-arm cuff device. It lists a Korotkoff-sound auscultatory device as an alternative, not as a technique incorporated into oscillometric devices. The cited guideline therefore supports the role of brachial-cuff BP measurements in clinical recommendations, but not that methodological equivalence or the claim about WHO recommendations. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [11] Whelton, P. K. et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Hypertension 71, e13–e115 (2018). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] Williams, B. et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension. J. Hypertens. 36, 1953–2041 (2018). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“HBPM is currently recommended as the best method for long-term follow-up of patients who are being treated for hypertension6,12,44.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Home BP monitoring and BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] Williams, B. et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension. J. Hypertens. 36, 1953–2041 (2018). source
- Supportedcites [44] Parati, G. et al. Home blood pressure monitoring: methodology, clinical relevance and practical application: a 2021 position paper by the Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability of the European Society of Hypertension. J. Hypertens. 39, 1742–1767 (2021). source
The ‘HOME vs. ABPM’ section (page not available) recommends HBPM for long-term follow-up, while reserving ABPM for situations needing special evaluation. It also says current guidelines recommend HBPM particularly for monitoring long-term BP control in treated hypertensive patients. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A meta-analysis of studies that compared intra-arterial BP readings with brachial cuff BP readings showed that the latter underestimated systolic BP levels and overestimated intra-arterial diastolic BP levels (by 5–6 mmHg for each measurement), resulting in considerable underestimation of pulse pressure34.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Intra-arterial versus non-invasive cuff-based methods
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [34] Picone, D. S. et al. Accuracy of cuff-measured blood pressure: systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 70, 572–586 (2017). source
The Abstract reports that cuff BP underestimated intra-arterial brachial systolic BP by 5.7 mm Hg and overestimated intra-arterial diastolic BP by 5.5 mm Hg. The Cuff BP Validation Standards section reports significant underestimation of intra-arterial brachial pulse pressure. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“To date, no regulatory requirements exist for independent validation of all BP devices that are put on the market (using the universally accepted International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard), despite increasing calls to mandate validation of these devices16.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > Classification, diagnostic and treatment thresholds
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [16] Sharman, J. E. et al. Lancet Commission on Hypertension Group position statement on the global improvement of accuracy standards for devices that measure blood pressure. J. Hypertens. 38, 21–29 (2020). source
In ‘How a Blood Pressure Device Becomes Approved for Sale’ (page unavailable), the paper says conformity with published standards is not required by law. In ‘Recommendations and Actions to Address Identified Problems’ (page unavailable), it calls for legislation requiring independent validation under the ISO standard before sale, supporting the claim that such a requirement does not yet cover all marketed BP devices. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“at present, a standardized validation protocol has not been established for assessing the accuracy of these devices, and thus their accuracy and clinical usefulness remain questionable37.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Central BP levels and variability
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [37] Sharman, J. E. et al. Validation of non-invasive central blood pressure devices: ARTERY Society Task Force consensus statement on protocol standardization. Eur. Heart J. 38, 2805–2812 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page unavailable) says that, without standardized guidelines, central BP devices had not been accuracy-tested using uniform, comparable protocols. But the Conclusions and future directions (page unavailable) caution against dismissing their clinical use: some devices had already shown physiological or prognostic significance. The claim therefore overstates how questionable their clinical usefulness is. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Mounting evidence, including data from the CARDIA study27 and the ARIC cohort28, indicates that individuals with high cumulative systolic BP levels over many years have worse cardiac function and increased risk of incident heart failure in later life compared with individuals with lower cumulative systolic BP levels.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > BP snapshots versus BP profile
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [27] Kishi, S. et al. Cumulative blood pressure in early adulthood and cardiac dysfunction in middle age: the CARDIA study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 65, 2679–2687 (2015). source
The Results report that higher cumulative systolic BP over 25 years was associated with measures of worse left ventricular function in CARDIA participants at middle age. This citation identifies the CARDIA evidence; the citing sentence separately attaches the ARIC citation to the incident-heart-failure evidence. The CARDIA paper itself used a subclinical cardiac-function endpoint, not incident heart failure. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Supportedcites [28] Teramoto, K. et al. Mid- to late-life time-averaged cumulative blood pressure and late-life cardiac structure, function, and heart failure. Hypertension 76, 808–818 (2020). source
The citation is attached to the ARIC cohort, not the CARDIA study. The Abstract reports that higher cumulative systolic BP over approximately 24 years was associated with worse late-life cardiac measures and greater risk of incident heart failure; the Conclusion states the same finding. Page numbers were not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“These devices use several different parameters and techniques to assess BP levels, including pulse transit time, pulse wave analysis, photoplethysmography and applanation tonometry, and have different intended uses (such as wearable devices for occasional use or for short-term continuous monitoring in an intensive care unit)55,56.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Cuffless wearable BP devices and BPV
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [55] Mukkamala, R. et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of cuffless blood pressure measurement devices: challenges and proposals. Hypertension 78, 1161–1167 (2021). source
The Types of Cuffless BP Measurement Devices section (page unavailable) distinguishes cuff-calibrated from calibration-free devices and describes wearable and anesthesia/surgery uses. The Proposals section (page unavailable) explicitly distinguishes intended uses such as screening, diagnosis, and therapy titration; the paper’s references also identify different measurement techniques. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [56] Mukkamala R., Stergiou G. S. & Avolio A. P. Cuffless blood pressure measurement. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 24, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-110220-014644 (2022). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A detailed evaluation of home BP monitoring (HBPM) devices available online in Australia reported that only 18.3% of upper-arm-cuff devices have been validated for accuracy, and that validated cuff BP devices are more expensive than non-validated devices17.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > Classification, diagnostic and treatment thresholds
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [17] Picone, D. S. et al. Nonvalidated home blood pressure devices dominate the online marketplace in Australia: major implications for cardiovascular risk management. Hypertension 75, 1593–1599 (2020). source
The Abstract (p. 4) reports that 18.3% of 278 upper-arm cuff devices available online in Australia were validated and that validated cuff devices cost more than non-validated ones. The Results (p. 8) also report a significant price difference for upper-arm and wrist cuff devices. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A 2016 meta-analysis of data from prospective cohort studies and clinical trials showed that increased long-term systolic BPV was associated with a higher risk of all-cause and cardiovascular death, cardiovascular events, coronary heart disease and stroke8.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Clinical implications of BPV
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [8] Stevens, S. L. et al. Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 354, i4098 (2016). source
The Abstract reports that the review included observational cohort studies and clinical trial cohorts. It states that increased long-term systolic blood-pressure variability was associated with higher risks of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease mortality and events, coronary heart disease, and stroke. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Moreover, substantial heterogeneity was present in the BPV indices used across the studies included in the meta-analysis, with standard deviation being the most common parameter8.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Clinical implications of BPV
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [8] Stevens, S. L. et al. Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 354, i4098 (2016). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods (Data analysis and statistical methods; page unavailable) list several BP variability measures used by studies, supporting the point that indices differed. They place standard deviation first in a preference hierarchy for selecting results, but do not say it was the most common index. The Discussion’s finding of significant heterogeneity concerns study results, not the indices used. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“However, cuffless devices have specific accuracy issues that are not present in the automated cuff BP devices, such as the need for individual user calibration and their questionable accuracy in tracking BP changes after calibration55,56.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Cuffless wearable BP devices and BPV
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [55] Mukkamala, R. et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of cuffless blood pressure measurement devices: challenges and proposals. Hypertension 78, 1161–1167 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Types of Cuffless BP Measurement Devices section says cuff-calibrated devices require calibration for an individual, but calibration-free devices do not. The Critical Review section says the accuracy of cuff-calibrated devices in tracking BP changes within an individual often remains unclear. Thus the tracking concern is supported, while the need for individual calibration does not apply to cuffless devices generally; page numbers were not provided. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [56] Mukkamala R., Stergiou G. S. & Avolio A. P. Cuffless blood pressure measurement. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 24, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-110220-014644 (2022). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Most of these devices require initial calibration in each user, which is usually performed by inputting a BP value measured using an upper-arm-cuff device or by inputting simple demographic data that are known to correlate with BP level (such as age and sex), with periodic recalibration required over time (every few hours, days or weeks).”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Cuffless wearable BP devices and BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
- Could not verifycites [17] Picone, D. S. et al. Nonvalidated home blood pressure devices dominate the online marketplace in Australia: major implications for cardiovascular risk management. Hypertension 75, 1593–1599 (2020). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (p. 7) and Discussion (p. 11) address the types and validation status of BP devices sold online, not how users calibrate them. Searches for cuffless-device calibration, demographic inputs, and periodic recalibration found no passage supporting the claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Partly supportedcites [55] Mukkamala, R. et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of cuffless blood pressure measurement devices: challenges and proposals. Hypertension 78, 1161–1167 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The “Types of Cuffless BP Measurement Devices” section says cuff-calibrated devices require periodic arm-cuff measurements, with intervals ranging from hours to weeks. It also identifies calibration-free devices that do not require calibration for each user, and does not establish that most devices require it. The “Simulation study” section treats demographic input as a feature of some calibration-free devices, not as periodic recalibration. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Therefore, these devices can provide detailed information on true BP profile and behaviour over time, as well as all types of BPV (including short-term to long-term BPV6,55–57), and have great potential for use in screening, early diagnosis, close monitoring and optimal management of hypertension.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Cuffless wearable BP devices and BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
- Partly supportedcites [55] Mukkamala, R. et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of cuffless blood pressure measurement devices: challenges and proposals. Hypertension 78, 1161–1167 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Potential of Cuffless Blood Pressure Measurement Devices section says these devices could provide a complete evaluation of BP level and behavior across daily circumstances and long periods. But the Critical Review of Data Presentation in Recent Studies cautions that their accuracy in tracking short- or long-term BP changes within an individual often remains unclear. The source therefore supports the potential for detailed monitoring, not the unqualified claim that cuffless devices can characterize all types of BP variability. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [56] Mukkamala R., Stergiou G. S. & Avolio A. P. Cuffless blood pressure measurement. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 24, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-110220-014644 (2022). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Furthermore, in the ACCORD trial76, visit-to-visit BPV was associated with the primary cardiovascular outcome, but this relationship was dependent on baseline BP levels; a stronger association was more evident in patients with low and high strata of baseline systolic and diastolic BP levels.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Clinical implications of BPV
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [76] Nuyujukian, D. S., Zhou, J. J., Koska, J. & Reaven, P. D. Refining determinants of associations of visit-to-visit blood pressure variability with cardiovascular risk: results from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes trial. J. Hypertens. 39, 2173–2182 (2021). source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Raised BP levels continue to be the leading cause of death globally9, highlighting the importance of accurate, broad and frequent assessment of BP levels in the general population.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Conclusions
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [9] GBD. 2019 Risk Factors Collaborators. Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet 396, 1223–1249 (2020). source
The Results section (Global attributable burden) identifies high systolic blood pressure as the leading global Level 2 risk factor for attributable deaths in 2019. That supports the cited claim about raised BP; the statement about the importance of frequent assessment is the citing authors’ own conclusion. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Interestingly, diastolic BPV was strongly associated with coronary heart disease, especially in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease and low baseline BP levels, which might indicate a pathophysiological mechanism of reduced coronary perfusion during diastole in patients with diastolic BPV76.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Clinical implications of BPV
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [76] Nuyujukian, D. S., Zhou, J. J., Koska, J. & Reaven, P. D. Refining determinants of associations of visit-to-visit blood pressure variability with cardiovascular risk: results from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes trial. J. Hypertens. 39, 2173–2182 (2021). source
The Results section reports a strong association between diastolic BP variability and major coronary heart disease in participants with prior cardiovascular disease, strongest among those with low baseline blood pressure. The Discussion presents reduced coronary perfusion during diastole as a possible mechanism, matching the citing sentence’s tentative wording. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In an analysis of the SPRINT trial77,78, which enrolled patients with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk, all-cause mortality was independently associated with visit-to-visit systolic BPV quantified using VIM or maximum minus minimum BP levels, but was not associated with systolic BPV quantified using the coefficient of variation.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Clinical implications of BPV
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [77] Chang, T. I. et al. Visit-to-visit office blood pressure variability and cardiovascular outcomes in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial). Hypertension 70, 751–758 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Partly supportedcites [78] Cheng, Y. et al. Visit-to-visit office blood pressure variability combined with Framingham risk score to predict all-cause mortality: a post hoc analysis of the systolic blood pressure intervention trial. J. Clin. Hypertens. 23, 1516–1525 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but their accuracy and utility remain uncertain”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the implications of BP variability on cardiovascular outcomes have largely been ignored, with limited application in clinical practice”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Novel cuffless wearable technologies might provide a detailed assessment of the 24 h BP profile and behaviour over weeks or months.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Abstract
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These devices offer many advantages for researchers and patients compared with traditional BP monitors”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“At present, 24 h ABPM is recommended as the best available method for diagnosing hypertension6,12.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Ambulatory BP monitoring and BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] Williams, B. et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension. J. Hypertens. 36, 1953–2041 (2018). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“The concept of cumulative BP or BP load, defined as the percentage of abnormally elevated BP readings over a period of time, although not identical to BPV, also illustrates how frequent elevations in BP levels are linked with increased cardiovascular risk26.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > BP snapshots versus BP profile
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [26] Schutte, A. E. & Gnanenthiran, S. R. Toward a better understanding of why cumulative blood pressure is such a strong predictor of cardiovascular outcomes. Hypertension 78, 1267–1269 (2021). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Office BP assessment also misses masked hypertension (defined as normal BP levels in the office but elevated BP levels outside of the office), a condition present in 10–20% of individuals attending BP clinics20.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > Classification, diagnostic and treatment thresholds
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [20] Stergiou, G. S. et al. Phenotypes of masked hypertension: isolated ambulatory, isolated home and dual masked hypertension. J. Hypertens. 38, 218–223 (2020). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite these advantages, 24 h ambulatory BPV has inconsistent prognostic value, probably owing to the imperfect reproducibility of 24 h ABPM and the variable day-to-day activities of individuals.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Ambulatory BP monitoring and BPV
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Aside from traditional ABPM and HBPM devices, wearable watch-like BP devices with a thin wrist-cuff have been developed, which can take BP measurements when prompted by the individual at any time of day, and are currently being validated for accuracy54.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Complementary roles of ABPM and HBPM
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [54] Kuwabara, M., Harada, K., Hishiki, Y. & Kario, K. Validation of two watch-type wearable blood pressure monitors according to the ANSI/AAMI/ISO81060-2:2013 guidelines: Omron HEM-6410T-ZM and HEM-6410T-ZL. J. Clin. Hypertens. 21, 853–858 (2019). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the prognostic value of office BPV is dependent on the measurement methodology (for example, the number of visits or the use of standardized protocols) and drug treatment (dosing time and compliance)43.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Office BP readings and BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [43] Levitan, E. B., Kaciroti, N., Oparil, S., Julius, S. & Muntner, P. Blood pressure measurement device, number and timing of visits, and intra-individual visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure. J. Clin. Hypertens. 14, 744–750 (2012). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Two studies that assessed 24 h intra-arterial BP recordings in patients hospitalized with essential hypertension showed that BPV was related to the rate and severity of target-organ damage and, more importantly, was predictive of disease progression32,33.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Intra-arterial versus non-invasive cuff-based methods
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [32] Parati, G., Pomidossi, G., Albini, F., Malaspina, D. & Mancia, G. Relationship of 24-h blood pressure mean and variability to severity of target-organ damage in hypertension. J. Hypertens. 5, 93–98 (1987). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [33] Frattola, A., Parati, G., Cuspidi, C., Albini, F. & Mancia, G. Prognostic value of 24-h blood pressure variability. J. Hypertens. 11, 1133–1137 (1993). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“HBPM provides a more accurate portrayal of BPV than in-office BP measurement, given that it can provide a much larger number of readings over time.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Home BP monitoring and BPV
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Both BP levels and BPV are linked to the arterial site at which the BP is recorded and the time that the reading is taken31.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [31] Stergiou, G. S., Kollias, A. & Protogerou, A. D. Evidence on blood pressure measurement methodology and clinical implementation: research agenda for the 21st century. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 70, 587–589 (2017). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“However, these two methods have been shown to be inconsistent in the diagnosis of white-coat or masked hypertension in approximately 15–20% of individuals, in which a diagnosis of hypertension was confirmed by one method only6,11.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Complementary roles of ABPM and HBPM
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [11] Whelton, P. K. et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Hypertension 71, e13–e115 (2018). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Large meta-analyses have shown that central systolic BP levels, compared with their brachial counterpart, are more closely associated with indices of target-organ damage and have independent prognostic value in terms of cardiovascular outcomes35,36.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Central BP levels and variability
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [35] Kollias, A., Lagou, S., Zeniodi, M. E., Boubouchairopoulou, N. & Stergiou, G. S. Association of central versus brachial blood pressure with target-organ damage: systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypertension 67, 183–190 (2016). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [36] Vlachopoulos, C. et al. Prediction of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality with central haemodynamics: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. Heart J. 31, 1865–1871 (2010). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The invasive intra-arterial method provides direct assessment of BP levels and is theoretically the gold standard for measuring BP levels and short-term BPV.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Classic and novel BP monitoring methods > Intra-arterial versus non-invasive cuff-based methods
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Collectively, the challenge is that office BP assessment is a crude measurement and when used in isolation might often result in an incorrect or a missed diagnosis of hypertension.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > The clinical relevance of ‘average’ BP levels > Classification, diagnostic and treatment thresholds
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“All these classifications of BPV represent complex, continuous and dynamic interactions between intrinsic (regulatory neurohormonal and cardiovascular) mechanisms and extrinsic (environmental and behavioural) factors and are essential for maintaining BP ‘homeostasis’ to ensure adequate vital organ perfusion under varying conditions41,42.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Types and indices of BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [41] Parati, G., Ochoa, J. E., Lombardi, C. & Bilo, G. Assessment and management of blood-pressure variability. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 10, 143–155 (2013). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Parati, G., Torlasco, C., Pengo, M., Bilo, G. & Ochoa, J. E. Blood pressure variability: its relevance for cardiovascular homeostasis and cardiovascular diseases. Hypertens. Res. 43, 609–620 (2020). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Given that both the standard deviation and the coefficient of variation are affected by diurnal BP variation, these parameters should be weighted for the duration of the awake and asleep periods when assessing 24 h BPV61.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Types and indices of BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [61] Bilo, G. et al. A new method for assessing 24-h blood pressure variability after excluding the contribution of nocturnal blood pressure fall. J. Hypertens. 25, 2058–2066 (2007). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the VALUE trial75, a higher visit-to-visit systolic BPV was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events in patients with hypertension, irrespective of baseline cardiovascular risk, and this association was stronger in younger patients and those with lower systolic BP levels.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Clinical implications of BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [75] Mehlum, M. H. et al. Blood pressure variability and risk of cardiovascular events and death in patients with hypertension and different baseline risks. Eur. Heart J. 39, 2243–2251 (2018). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“BP readings obtained using traditional methods show only moderate reproducibility, with out-of-office BP measurements being more reproducible than those taken in the office63.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Clinical implications of BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [63] Stergiou, G. S. et al. Reproducibility of home, ambulatory, and clinic blood pressure: implications for the design of trials for the assessment of antihypertensive drug efficacy. Am. J. Hypertens. 15, 101–104 (2002). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Conversely, increased BPV might also reflect alterations in functional and structural cardiovascular and renal regulatory mechanisms, subclinical or established cardiovascular damage, or underlying pathological conditions associated with autonomic dysfunction, which in turn are linked to poor prognosis41,42.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Types and indices of BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [41] Parati, G., Ochoa, J. E., Lombardi, C. & Bilo, G. Assessment and management of blood-pressure variability. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 10, 143–155 (2013). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Parati, G., Torlasco, C., Pengo, M., Bilo, G. & Ochoa, J. E. Blood pressure variability: its relevance for cardiovascular homeostasis and cardiovascular diseases. Hypertens. Res. 43, 609–620 (2020). source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, all-cause and cardiovascular mortality was significantly increased only in the highest BPV decile, implying that the pattern of this association might not be linear.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Clinical implications of BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [68] Juhanoja, E. P. et al. Outcome-driven thresholds for increased home blood pressure variability. Hypertension 69, 599–607 (2017). source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“These phenotypes also have only moderate reproducibility, which is attributable to inherent BPV6,20.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Clinical implications of BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Stergiou, G. S. et al. 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J. Hypertens. 39, 1293–1302 (2021). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [20] Stergiou, G. S. et al. Phenotypes of masked hypertension: isolated ambulatory, isolated home and dual masked hypertension. J. Hypertens. 38, 218–223 (2020). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the coefficient of variation (the standard deviation divided by the corresponding mean) is another widely used parameter of BPV because it is independent of the association with the average BP levels and thus enables the comparison between data with different average values41,42.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Types and indices of BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [41] Parati, G., Ochoa, J. E., Lombardi, C. & Bilo, G. Assessment and management of blood-pressure variability. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 10, 143–155 (2013). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Parati, G., Torlasco, C., Pengo, M., Bilo, G. & Ochoa, J. E. Blood pressure variability: its relevance for cardiovascular homeostasis and cardiovascular diseases. Hypertens. Res. 43, 609–620 (2020). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“All these indices assess different aspects of the complex BPV phenomenon and do not have uniform clinical and prognostic values.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Types and indices of BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [41] Parati, G., Ochoa, J. E., Lombardi, C. & Bilo, G. Assessment and management of blood-pressure variability. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 10, 143–155 (2013). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Parati, G., Torlasco, C., Pengo, M., Bilo, G. & Ochoa, J. E. Blood pressure variability: its relevance for cardiovascular homeostasis and cardiovascular diseases. Hypertens. Res. 43, 609–620 (2020). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Home BP monitoring devices seem to be the most feasible and efficient method for long-term self-monitoring in patients with hypertension.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Conclusions
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cuffless wearable BP monitoring technologies have considerable potential for improving hypertension screening, diagnosis, control and long-term follow-up.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Conclusions
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Office blood pressure (BP) measurements will continue to have a major role in the screening, diagnosis and management of hypertension, and thus need further refinement.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The key challenge is that BP is a continuous dynamic variable that is inadequately represented by the snapshot measurements provided by all the current clinically available methods.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: BP is a continuous dynamic variable.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, all the measurement methods for assessing BPV should be regarded as complementary rather than interchangeable or competitive.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Clinical implications of BPV
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, although the methods currently used to estimate BPV indicate that increased BPV confers an adverse prognosis, its additive value over and beyond that of average BP levels and its role in risk stratification remain unknown.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Barriers in implementation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, although numerous classes of antihypertensive drugs have similar effects on BP levels, they have differential effects on BPV.”
§ Blood pressure and its variability: classic and novel measurement techniques > Clinical relevance of BPV > Antihypertensive drugs and BPV
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [90] Rothwell, P. M. et al. Effects of beta blockers and calcium-channel blockers on within-individual variability in blood pressure and risk of stroke. Lancet Neurol. 9, 469–480 (2010). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
BP is a continuous dynamic variable.
“The key challenge is that BP is a continuous dynamic variable that is inadequately represented by the snapshot measurements provided by all the current clinically available methods.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Snapshot office BP measurements have been extremely effective in predicting cardiovascular risk.
“However, given that snapshot office BP measurements have been extremely effective in predicting cardiovascular risk, the goal of improving cardiovascular risk prediction with existing out-of-office BP monitoring methods or BPV measurement methods remains a challenge.”
The paper relies on this without support.
BP measurement is the only method for diagnosing and managing hypertension.
“Regardless of the advances in novel technologies in this field, BP measurement remains the only method for the diagnosis and management of hypertension.”
Citations
Cites
International Organization for Standardization
(2011) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/springerreference_16847 · Cited by 12,504
Murray, C. J. L., Aravkin, A. Y., Zheng, P., Abbafati, C., Abbas, K. M., Abbasi-Kangevari, M., Abd-Allah, F., Abdelalim, A., Abdollahi, M., Abdollahpour, I., et al. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30752-2 · Cited by 9,854
Whelton, P. K., Carey, R. M., Aronow, W. S., Casey, D. E., Collins, K. J., Dennison Himmelfarb, C., DePalma, S. M., Gidding, S., Jamerson, K. A., Jones, D. W., et al. (2018) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hyp.0000000000000065 · Cited by 7,391
2020 International Society of Hypertension Global Hypertension Practice Guidelines
Unger, T., Borghi, C., Charchar, F., Khan, N. A., Poulter, N. R., Prabhakaran, D., Ramirez, A., Schlaich, M., Stergiou, G. S., Tomaszewski, M., et al. (2020) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.120.15026 · Cited by 4,132
Self-citationWilliams, B., Mancia, G., Spiering, W., Agabiti Rosei, E., Azizi, M., Burnier, M., Clement, D. L., Coca, A., de Simone, G., Dominiczak, A., et al. (2018) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000001940 · Cited by 2,885
Rothwell, P. M., Howard, S. C., Dolan, E., O'Brien, E., Dobson, J. E., Dahlöf, B., Sever, P. S., & Poulter, N. R. (2010) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60308-x · Cited by 1,784
Vlachopoulos, C., Aznaouridis, K., O'Rourke, M. F., Safar, M. E., Baou, K., & Stefanadis, C. (2010) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehq024 · Cited by 1,363
2020 International Society of Hypertension global hypertension practice guidelines
Unger, T., Borghi, C., Charchar, F., Khan, N. A., Poulter, N. R., Prabhakaran, D., Ramirez, A., Schlaich, M., Stergiou, G. S., Tomaszewski, M., et al. (2020) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002453 · Cited by 1,283
Self-citationKario, K., Pickering, T. G., Umeda, Y., Hoshide, S., Hoshide, Y., Morinari, M., Murata, M., Kuroda, T., Schwartz, J. E., & Shimada, K. (2003) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.0000056521.67546.aa · Cited by 1,250
Whelton, P. K., Carey, R. M., Aronow, W. S., Casey, D. E., Collins, K. J., Dennison Himmelfarb, C., DePalma, S. M., Gidding, S., Jamerson, K. A., Jones, D. W., et al. (2018) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000596 · Cited by 1,127
Rahimi, K., Bidel, Z., Nazarzadeh, M., Copland, E., Canoy, D., Ramakrishnan, R., Pinho-Gomes, A.-C., Woodward, M., Adler, A., Agodoa, L., et al. (2021) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00590-0 · Cited by 1,074
European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring
Parati, G., Stergiou, G., O’Brien, E., Asmar, R., Beilin, L., Bilo, G., Clement, D., de la Sierra, A., de Leeuw, P., Dolan, E., et al. (2014) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000000221 · Cited by 1,021
Self-citationParati, G., Pomidossi, G., Albini, F., Malaspina, D., & Mancia, G. (1987) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/00004872-198702000-00013 · Cited by 952
Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis
Stevens, S. L., Wood, S., Koshiaris, C., Law, K., Glasziou, P., Stevens, R. J., & McManus, R. J. (2016) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.i4098 · Cited by 871
Stergiou, G. S., Palatini, P., Parati, G., O’Brien, E., Januszewicz, A., Lurbe, E., Persu, A., Mancia, G., Kreutz, R., & on behalf of the European Society of Hypertension Council and the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability (2021) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002843 · Cited by 859
Self-citationAssessment and management of blood-pressure variability
Parati, G., Ochoa, J. E., Lombardi, C., & Bilo, G. (2013) · Nature Reviews Cardiology · doi:10.1038/nrcardio.2013.1 · Cited by 853
Chida, Y., & Steptoe, A. (2010) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.109.146621 · Cited by 787
Webb, A. J., Fischer, U., Mehta, Z., & Rothwell, P. M. (2010) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60235-8 · Cited by 729
Rothwell, P. M., Howard, S. C., Dolan, E., O'Brien, E., Dobson, J. E., Dahlöf, B., Poulter, N. R., & Sever, P. S. (2010) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(10)70066-1 · Cited by 690
Prognostic value of 24-hour blood pressure variability
Frattola, A., Parati, G., Cuspidi, C., Albini, F., & Mancia, G. (1993) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/00004872-199310000-00019 · Cited by 659
Hansen, T. W., Thijs, L., Li, Y., Boggia, J., Kikuya, M., Björklund-Bodegård, K., Richart, T., Ohkubo, T., Jeppesen, J., Torp-Pedersen, C., et al. (2010) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.109.140798 · Cited by 480
Alerting reaction and rise in blood pressure during measurement by physician and nurse.
Mancia, G., Parati, G., Pomidossi, G. A., Grassi, G. M., Casadei, R., & Zanchetti, A. (1987) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/01.hyp.9.2.209 · Cited by 478
Stergiou, G. S., Alpert, B., Mieke, S., Asmar, R., Atkins, N., Eckert, S., Frick, G., Friedman, B., Graßl, T., Ichikawa, T., et al. (2018) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.117.10237 · Cited by 469
Self-citationFinal Report of a Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control
The SPRINT Research Group (2021) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1901281 · Cited by 454
Thomopoulos, C., Parati, G., & Zanchetti, A. (2014) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000000378 · Cited by 388
Kallioinen, N., Hill, A., Horswill, M. S., Ward, H. E., & Watson, M. O. (2017) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000001197 · Cited by 357
Muntner, P., Whittle, J., Lynch, A. I., Colantonio, L. D., Simpson, L. M., Einhorn, P. T., Levitan, E. B., Whelton, P. K., Cushman, W. C., Louis, G. T., et al. (2015) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m14-2803 · Cited by 324
Gosmanova, E. O., Mikkelsen, M. K., Molnar, M. Z., Lü, J., Yessayan, L., Kalantar‐Zadeh, K., & Kovesdy, C. P. (2016) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2016.06.054 · Cited by 293
Ayman, D., & Goldshine, A. D. (1940) · The American Journal of the Medical Sciences · doi:10.1097/00000441-194010000-00005 · Cited by 293
Kollias, A., Lagou, S., Zeniodi, M. E., Boubouchairopoulou, N., & Stergiou, G. S. (2016) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.115.06066 · Cited by 287
Self-citationAccuracy of Cuff-Measured Blood Pressure
Picone, D. S., Schultz, M. G., Otahal, P., Aakhus, S., Al-Jumaily, A. M., Black, J. A., Bos, W. J., Chambers, J. B., Chen, C.-H., Cheng, H.-M., et al. (2017) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.05.064 · Cited by 277
Manning, L., Hirakawa, Y., Arima, H., Wang, X., Chalmers, J., Wang, J., Lindley, R., Heeley, E., Delcourt, C., Neal, B., et al. (2014) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(14)70018-3 · Cited by 273
A Short History of Blood Pressure Measurement
Booth, J. (1977) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine · doi:10.1177/003591577707001112 · Cited by 269
Stergiou, G. S., Baibas, N. M., Gantzarou, A. P., Skeva, I. I., Kalkana, C. B., Roussias, L. G., & Mountokalakis, T. D. (2002) · American Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1016/s0895-7061(01)02324-x · Cited by 268
Self-citationBilo, G., Giglio, A., Styczkiewicz, K., Caldara, G., Maronati, A., Kawecka-Jaszcz, K., Mancia, G., & Parati, G. (2007) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0b013e32829c6a60 · Cited by 246
Continuous vs intermittent blood pressure measurements in estimating 24-hour average blood pressure.
di Rienzo, M., Grassi, G., Pedotti, A., & Mancia, G. (1983) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/01.hyp.5.2.264 · Cited by 239
Visit-to-Visit Variability of Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Disease and All-Cause Mortality
Diaz, K. M., Tanner, R. M., Falzon, L., Levitan, E. B., Reynolds, K., Shimbo, D., & Muntner, P. (2014) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.114.03903 · Cited by 233
Sharman, J. E., Avolio, A. P., Baulmann, J., Benetos, A., Blacher, J., Blizzard, C. L., Boutouyrie, P., Chen, C.-H., Chowienczyk, P., Cockcroft, J. R., et al. (2017) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehw632 · Cited by 231
Self-citationMehlum, M. H., Liestøl, K., Kjeldsen, S. E., Julius, S., Hua, T. A., Rothwell, P. M., Mancia, G., Parati, G., Weber, M. A., & Berge, E. (2018) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehx760 · Cited by 227
Evaluation of the Accuracy of Cuffless Blood Pressure Measurement Devices: Challenges and Proposals
Mukkamala, R., Yavarimanesh, M., Natarajan, K., Hahn, J.-O., Kyriakoulis, K. G., Avolio, A. P., & Stergiou, G. S. (2021) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.17747 · Cited by 211
Self-citationClinical Value of Ambulatory Blood Pressure: Evidence and Limits
Mancia, G., & Verdecchia, P. (2015) · Circulation Research · doi:10.1161/circresaha.116.303755 · Cited by 211
Blood Pressure Assessment in Adults in Clinical Practice and Clinic-Based Research
Muntner, P., Einhorn, P. T., Cushman, W. C., Whelton, P. K., Bello, N. A., Drawz, P. E., Green, B. B., Jones, D. W., Juraschek, S. P., Margolis, K. L., et al. (2019) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.10.069 · Cited by 199
Self-citationParati, G., Omboni, S., Rizzoni, D., Agabiti‐Rosei, E., & Manciaa, G. (1998) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/00004872-199816110-00016 · Cited by 196
Shimbo, D., Newman, J. D., Aragaki, A. K., LaMonte, M. J., Bavry, A. A., Allison, M., Manson, J. E., & Wassertheil-Smoller, S. W. (2012) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.112.193094 · Cited by 195
Palatini, P., Reboldi, G., Beilin, L. J., Casiglia, E., Eguchi, K., Imai, Y., Kario, K., Ohkubo, T., Pierdomenico, S. D., Schwartz, J. E., et al. (2014) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.114.03694 · Cited by 193
Cuffless Blood Pressure Measurement
Mukkamala, R., Stergiou, G. S., & Avolio, A. P. (2022) · Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1146/annurev-bioeng-110220-014644 · Cited by 180
Self-citationParati, G., Stergiou, G. S., Bilo, G., Kollias, A., Pengo, M., Ochoa, J. E., Agarwal, R., Asayama, K., Asmar, R., Burnier, M., et al. (2021) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002922 · Cited by 178
Self-citationFatani, N., Dixon, D. L., Van Tassell, B. W., Fanikos, J., & Buckley, L. F. (2021) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.01.014 · Cited by 173
Zhang, Y., Agnoletti, D., Safar, M. E., & Blacher, J. (2011) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.111.174383 · Cited by 162
Cumulative Blood Pressure in Early Adulthood and Cardiac Dysfunction in Middle Age
Kishi, S., Teixido-Tura, G., Ning, H., Venkatesh, B. A., Wu, C., Almeida, A., Choi, E.-Y., Gjesdal, O., Jacobs, D. R., Schreiner, P. J., et al. (2015) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.04.042 · Cited by 143
Kuwabara, M., Harada, K., Hishiki, Y., & Kario, K. (2019) · The Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/jch.13499 · Cited by 140
Sharman, J. E., O’Brien, E., Alpert, B., Schutte, A. E., Delles, C., Hecht Olsen, M., Asmar, R., Atkins, N., Barbosa, E., Calhoun, D., et al. (2020) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002246 · Cited by 139
Self-citationde Heus, R. A. A., Tzourio, C., Lee, E. J. L., Opozda, M., Vincent, A. D., Anstey, K. J., Hofman, A., Kario, K., Lattanzi, S., Launer, L. J., et al. (2021) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.17797 · Cited by 138
Manning, G., Rushton, L., Donnelly, R., & Millar-Craig, M. W. (2000) · American Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1016/s0895-7061(00)00261-2 · Cited by 138
Blood pressure variability: its relevance for cardiovascular homeostasis and cardiovascular diseases
Parati, G., Torlasco, C., Pengo, M., Bilo, G., & Ochoa, J. E. (2020) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1038/s41440-020-0421-5 · Cited by 137
Picone, D. S., Deshpande, R. A., Schultz, M. G., Fonseca, R., Campbell, N. R. C., Delles, C., Hecht Olsen, M., Schutte, A. E., Stergiou, G., Padwal, R., et al. (2020) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.120.14719 · Cited by 118
Self-citationMancia, G., Facchetti, R., Bombelli, M., Cuspidi, C., & Grassi, G. (2021) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.16489 · Cited by 110
Stergiou, G., Alpert, B., Mieke, S., Asmar, R. G., Atkins, N., Eckert, S., Frick, G., Friedman, B., Graßl, T., Ichikawa, T., et al. (2018) · UCL Discovery (University College London) · Cited by 110
Self-citationPadwal, R., Campbell, N. R. C., Schutte, A. E., Olsen, M. H., Delles, C., Etyang, A., Cruickshank, J. K., Stergiou, G., Rakotz, M. K., Wozniak, G., et al. (2019) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002112 · Cited by 108
Self-citationChang, T. I., Reboussin, D. M., Chertow, G. M., Cheung, A. K., Cushman, W. C., Kostis, W. J., Parati, G., Raj, D., Riessen, E., Shapiro, B., et al. (2017) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.117.09788 · Cited by 104
Self-citationBlood pressure variability assessed by home measurements: a systematic review
Stergiou, G. S., Ntineri, A., Kollias, A., Ohkubo, T., Imai, Y., & Parati, G. (2014) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1038/hr.2014.2 · Cited by 102
Self-citationCuffless Blood Pressure Monitoring: Promises and Challenges
Pandit, J. A., Lores, E., & Batlle, D. (2020) · Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology · doi:10.2215/cjn.03680320 · Cited by 101
Validation protocols for blood pressure measuring devices in the 21st century
Stergiou, G. S., Alpert, B. S., Mieke, S., Wang, J., & O'Brien, E. (2018) · The Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/jch.13294 · Cited by 92
Self-citationRisk Factor Variability and Cardiovascular Outcome
Messerli, F. H., Hofstetter, L., Rimoldi, S. F., Rexhaj, E., & Bangalore, S. (2019) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2019.02.063 · Cited by 87
Outcome-Driven Thresholds for Increased Home Blood Pressure Variability
Juhanoja, E. P., Niiranen, T. J., Johansson, J. K., Puukka, P. J., Thijs, L., Asayama, K., Langén, V. L., Hozawa, A., Aparicio, L. S., Ohkubo, T., et al. (2017) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.116.08603 · Cited by 83
Self-citationLevitan, E. B., Kaciroti, N., Oparil, S., Julius, S., & Muntner, P. (2012) · The Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/jch.12005 · Cited by 83
Cuspidi, C., Meani, S., Salerno, M., Valerio, C., Fusi, V, Severgnini, B., Lonati, L., Magrini, F., & Zanchetti, A. (2004) · Journal of Human Hypertension · doi:10.1038/sj.jhh.1001681 · Cited by 79
Ohkuma, T., Woodward, M., Jun, M., Muntner, P., Hata, J., Colagiuri, S., Harrap, S. B., Mancia, G., Poulter, N. R., Williams, B., et al. (2017) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.117.09359 · Cited by 79
Mena, L. J., Maestre, G. E., Hansen, T. W., Thijs, L., Liu, Y., Boggia, J., Li, Y., Kikuya, M., Bjorklund-Bodegard, K., Ohkubo, T., et al. (2014) · American Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1093/ajh/hpt142 · Cited by 72
Wang, J., Yan, P., & Jeffers, B. W. (2014) · Journal of the American Society of Hypertension · doi:10.1016/j.jash.2014.02.004 · Cited by 68
Long‐Term Blood Pressure Variability and Risk of Cognitive Decline and Dementia Among Older Adults
Ernst, M. E., Ryan, J., Chowdhury, E. K., Margolis, K. L., Beilin, L. J., Reid, C. M., Nelson, M. R., Woods, R. L., Shah, R. C., Orchard, S. G., et al. (2021) · Journal of the American Heart Association · doi:10.1161/jaha.120.019613 · Cited by 55
Limited reproducibility of MUCH and WUCH: evidence from the ELSA study
Mancia, G., Facchetti, R., Cuspidi, C., Bombelli, M., Corrao, G., & Grassi, G. (2020) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz651 · Cited by 53
Stergiou, G. S., O'Brien, E., Myers, M., Palatini, P., Parati, G., Kollias, A., Birmpas, D., Kyriakoulis, K., Bountzona, I., Stambolliu, E., et al. (2019) · The Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/jch.13710 · Cited by 53
Self-citationTime spent at blood pressure target and the risk of death and cardiovascular diseases
Chung, S.-C., Pujades-Rodriguez, M., Duyx, B., Denaxas, S. C., Pasea, L., Hingorani, A., Timmis, A., Williams, B., & Hemingway, H. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0202359 · Cited by 51
Kollias, A., Stergiou, G. S., Kyriakoulis, K. G., Bilo, G., & Parati, G. (2017) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.117.10087 · Cited by 49
Self-citationAccuracy of Cuff-Measured Blood Pressure: Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
Picone, D., Schultz, M., Otahal, P., Aakhus, S., Al-Jumaily, A., Ja, B., Bos, W., Chambers, J., Chen, C., Cheng, H., et al. (2017) · UCL Discovery (University College London) · Cited by 48
Dasa, O., Smith, S. M., Howard, G., Cooper‐DeHoff, R. M., Gong, Y., Handberg, E. M., & Pepine, C. J. (2021) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.8418 · Cited by 44
Stergiou, G. S., & Parati, G. (2011) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.111.172924 · Cited by 37
Self-citationAgreement between ambulatory, home, and office blood pressure variability
Juhanoja, E. P., Niiranen, T. J., Johansson, J. K., Puukka, P. J., & Jula, A. M. (2016) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000000772 · Cited by 36
Teramoto, K., Nadruz Junior, W., Matsushita, K., Claggett, B., John, J. E., Skali, H., Solomon, S., Cheng, S., & Shah, A. M. (2020) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.120.14833 · Cited by 36
Intraindividual Reproducibility of Blood Pressure Surge upon Rising after Nighttime Sleep and Siesta
Stergiou, G. S., Mastorantonakis, S. E., & Roussias, L. G. (2008) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1291/hypres.31.1859 · Cited by 31
Self-citationStergiou, G. S. (2001) · American Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1016/s0895-7061(01)01505-9 · Cited by 27
Self-citationWan, E. Y. F., Yu, E. Y. T., Chin, W. Y., Fong, D., Choi, E. P. H., & Lam, C. L. K. (2020) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002347 · Cited by 27
Boubouchairopoulou, N., Ntineri, A., Kollias, A., Destounis, A., & Stergiou, G. S. (2021) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1038/s41440-021-00736-9 · Cited by 25
Self-citationCheng, Y., Li, J., Ren, X., Wang, D., Yang, Y., Miao, Y., Sheng, C., & Tian, J. (2021) · The Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/jch.14314 · Cited by 25
Phenotypes of masked hypertension: Isolated ambulatory, isolated home and dual masked hypertension
Stergiou, G. S., Kyriakoulis, K. G., McManus, R. J., Andreadis, E. A., Jula, A., Kollias, A., Lindroos, A., Ntineri, A., Schwartz, C., & Niiranen, T. J. (2020) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002270 · Cited by 24
Self-citationDay‐by‐day blood pressure variability in hospitalized patients with COVID‐19
Li, F., An, D., Guo, Q., Zhang, Y., Qian, J., Hu, W., Li, Y., & Wang, J. (2021) · The Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/jch.14338 · Cited by 19
Reproducibility study of nocturnal blood pressure dipping in patients with high cardiovascular risk
Burgos‐Alonso, N., Ruiz Arzalluz, M. V., Garcia‐Alvarez, A., Fernandez‐Fernandez de Quincoces, D., & Grandes, G. (2021) · The Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/jch.14222 · Cited by 19
Diaz, K., Tanner, R. M., Falzon, L., Levitan, E. B., Reynolds, K., Shimbo, D., & Muntner, P. (2014) · Hypertension · doi:10.7916/d8jd4wpc · Cited by 19
Central blood pressure variability is increased in hypertensive patients with target organ damage
de la Sierra, A., Pareja, J., Yun, S., Acosta, E., Aiello, T. F., Oliveras, A., González, S. V., Armario, P., Blanch, P., Sierra, C., et al. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/jch.13172 · Cited by 16
Shimbo, D., Newman, J., Aragaki, A. K., LaMonte, M. J., Bavry, A. A., Allison, M., Manson, J. E., Wassertheil-Smoller, S., Psaty, B. M., & Muntner, P. (2012) · Hypertension · doi:10.7916/d8k64j2d · Cited by 16
Nuyujukian, D. S., Zhou, J. J., Koska, J., & Reaven, P. D. (2021) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002931 · Cited by 14
Chi, C., Yu, S.-K., Auckle, R., Argyris, A. A., Nasothimiou, E., Tountas, C., Aissopou, E., Blacher, J., Safar, M. E., Sfikakis, P. P., et al. (2017) · Journal of Human Hypertension · doi:10.1038/jhh.2017.37 · Cited by 12
Melgarejo, J. D., Maestre, G. E., Mena, L. J., Lee, J. H., Petitto, M., Chávez, C. A., Calmon, G., Silva, E., Thijs, L., Al-Aswad, L. A., et al. (2021) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1038/s41440-021-00687-1 · Cited by 11
Yu, S., Chi, C., Protogerou, A. D., Safar, M. E., Blacher, J., Argyris, A. A., Nasothimiou, E. G., Sfikakis, P. P., Papaioannou, T. G., Xu, H., et al. (2018) · The Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/jch.13226 · Cited by 9
Schutte, A. E., & Gnanenthiran, S. R. (2021) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.121.18156 · Cited by 7
Self-citationEvidence on Blood Pressure Measurement Methodology and Clinical Implementation
Stergiou, G. S., Kollias, A., & Protogerou, A. D. (2017) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.06.026 · Cited by 7
Self-citation
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mancia, G., Kreutz, R., Brunström, M., Burnier, M., Grassi, G., Januszewicz, A., Muiesan, M. L., Tsioufis, K., Agabiti-Rosei, E., Algharably, E. A. E., et al. (2023) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000003480 · Cited by 3,473
Self-citation2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension
McEvoy, J. W., McCarthy, C. P., Bruno, R. M., Brouwers, S., Canavan, M. D., Ceconi, C., Christodorescu, R. M., Daskalopoulou, S. S., Ferro, C. J., Gerdts, E., et al. (2024) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehae178 · Cited by 2,298
Transforming Cardiovascular Care With Artificial Intelligence: From Discovery to Practice
Khera, R., Oikonomou, E. K., Nadkarni, G. N., Morley, J., Wiens, J., Butte, A. J., & Topol, E. J. (2024) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2024.05.003 · Cited by 324
Barbato, E., Azizi, M., Schmieder, R. E., Lauder, L., Böhm, M., Brouwers, S., Bruno, R. M., Dudek, D., Kahan, T., Kandzari, D. E., et al. (2023) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehad054 · Cited by 188
Stergiou, G. S., Avolio, A. P., Palatini, P., Kyriakoulis, K. G., Schutte, A. E., Mieke, S., Κόλλιας, Α., Parati, G., Asmar, R. G., Pantazis, N., et al. (2023) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000003483 · Cited by 150
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Schutte, A. E., Kollias, A., & Stergiou, G. S.
- Affiliations
- North-West University (ZA)
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
- Corresponding author
- Schutte, Aletta E.
- Venue
- Nature Reviews Cardiology
- Published
- 2022-04-19
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 643-654
- ISSN
- 1759-5002 (ISSN-L)
- 1759-5010
- PMC
- PMC9017082
- OpenAlex
- W4224274564
- Cited by
- 335
- References
- 109
- Citations by year
- 2026: 77 · 2025: 101 · 2024: 79 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 8
- FWCI
- 13.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature Reviews Cardiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
- Keywords
- blood pressure variability, hypertension, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, home blood pressure monitoring, cardiovascular outcomes, blood pressure measurement methods, antihypertensive therapy
- MeSH terms
- Wearable Electronic Devices, Blood Pressure, Blood Pressure Determination, Humans, Hypertension, 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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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