Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 167

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Doppler Ultrasonographic, Oscillometric Sphygmomanometric, and Photoplethysmographic Techniques for Noninvasive Blood Pressure Measurement in Anesthetized Cats

Binns, Sarah H., Sisson, D. David, Buoscio, Dana A., Schaeffer, David J.·1995·Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine

Abstract

Abstarct: Blood pressure (BP) measurements obtained using 3 indirect BP measuring instruments, a Doppler ultrasonic flowmeter, an oscillometric device, and a photoplethysmograph, were compared with direct arterial pressure measurements in 11 anesthetized cats. The standard deviation of the differences (SOD) between direct and indirect pressure measurements were not significantly different from each other (P<.01), and ranged from 10.82 to 24.32 mm Hg. The high SDD values indicate that indirect BP estimates obtained with all these devices must be interpreted cautiously in individual patients. The mean errors (calculated as the sum of the differences between direct and indirect pressure measurements divided by the number of observations) of the 3 indirect devices were significantly different for systolic (SAP), diastolic (DAP), and mean (MAP) arterial pressures (P<.05). The Doppler and photoplethysmographic devices had the highest overall accuracy, as indicated by mean error values of less than 10 mm Hg. Correlation coefficients varied from .88 to .96 for the Doppler flowmeter, and from .85 to .94 for the photoplethysmograph; for both devices, the regression line slopes were close to unity. The Doppler flowmeter detected a pulse under all experimental conditions. The photoplethysmograph was also efficient in obtaining BP measurements, obtaining over 90% of SAP, DAP, and MAP readings attempted. The oscillometric device was the least accurate, with mean error values varying from 10 to 22 mm Hg. Correlation coefficients were high (.90 to .94) for this device, but the slopes of the regression lines were 0.7 to 0.8, indicating a trend for increased error at higher BP. The oscillometric device tended to underestimate BP by increasing amounts as the BP increased. The oscillometric device was the least efficient device for obtaining BP measurements (P<.01).

Overview

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

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

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1939-1676.1995.tb03301.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

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

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

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 167

Metadata

Authors
Binns, S. H., Sisson, D. D., Buoscio, D. A., & Schaeffer, D. J.
Venue
Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine
Published
1995-11-01
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
405-414
ISSN
  • 0891-6640 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1676
OpenAlex
W2072352225
Cited by
167
References
3
FWCI
4.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

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

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

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

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

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Doppler Ultrasonographic, Oscillometric Sphygmomanometric, and Photoplethysmographic Techniques for Noninvasive Blood Pressure Measurement in Anesthetized Cats. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1939-1676.1995.tb03301.x
The paper
Binns, S. H., Sisson, D. D., Buoscio, D. A., & Schaeffer, D. J. (1995). Doppler Ultrasonographic, Oscillometric Sphygmomanometric, and Photoplethysmographic Techniques for Noninvasive Blood Pressure Measurement in Anesthetized Cats. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-1676.1995.tb03301.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.