Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 452

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Use and interpretation of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: recommendations of the British Hypertension Society

Open access
O'Brien, E.·2000·BMJ

Abstract

Over the past 20 years or so, the accuracy of using the conventional Riva-Rocci sphygmomanometer and Korotkoff's sounds to measure blood pressure has been questioned, and efforts have been made to improve measurements with automated devices.1 2 In the same period, the phenomenon of white coat hypertension has been recognised—whereby some patients who apparently have raised blood pressure actually have normal blood pressure when the measurement is repeated away from the medical environment; this has focused attention on methods of measurement that provide profiles of blood pressure rather than rely on isolated measurements made under circumstances that may influence blood pressure.3 These methods have included repeated measurements of blood pressure using the traditional technique, self measurement of blood pressure in the home or workplace, and ambulatory blood pressure measurement using automated devices.2 Ambulatory monitoring is advantageous because it gives multiple measurements throughout the day and night This paper considers only the ambulatory measurement of blood pressure in adults. Its purpose is not to make a case for or against ambulatory measurement; others have already done so.4 5 Although the results of a number of ongoing, longitudinal studies are forthcoming, there is now firm evidence that ambulatory blood pressure measurement is a more sensitive predictor of cardiovascular outcome than conventional measurement.6 We have not considered the complex issues of health economics that the increasing use of ambulatory measurement raises.7 We realise that this technique is being used more often and that doctors who find ambulatory measurement useful in the day to day management of patients with high blood pressure need recommendations from those who have experience. However, regardless of the technique used to diagnose hypertension it is only one factor in determining a patient's risk profile and must be assessed in relation to concomitant disease, …

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 · 10.1136/bmj.320.7242.1128

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 452

Metadata

Authors
O'Brien, E.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2000-04-22
Volume
320
Issue
7242
Pages
1128-1134
ISSN
0959-8138 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2052897055
Cited by
452
References
2
FWCI
19.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Use and interpretation of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: recommendations of the British Hypertension Society. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.320.7242.1128
The paper
O'Brien, E. (2000). Use and interpretation of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: recommendations of the British Hypertension Society. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7242.1128

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.