Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 668

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 177 of the 177 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Call to Action on Use and Reimbursement for Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: A Joint Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association, American Society of Hypertension, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association

Open access
Pickering, Thomas G., Miller, Nancy Houston, Ogedegbe, Gbenga, Krakoff, Lawrence R., Artinian, Nancy T., Goff, David·2008·Hypertension

Abstract

Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) overcomes many of the limitations of traditional office blood pressure (BP) measurement and is both cheaper and easier to perform than ambulatory BP monitoring. Monitors that use the oscillometric method are currently available that are accurate, reliable, easy to use, and relatively inexpensive. An increasing number of patients are using them regularly to check their BP at home, but although this has been endorsed by national and international guidelines, detailed recommendations for their use have been lacking. There is a rapidly growing literature showing that measurements taken by patients at home are often lower than readings taken in the office and closer to the average BP recorded by 24-hour ambulatory monitors, which is the BP that best predicts cardiovascular risk. Because of the larger numbers of readings that can be taken by HBPM than in the office and the elimination of the white-coat effect (the increase of BP during an office visit), home readings are more reproducible than office readings and show better correlations with measures of target organ damage. In addition, prospective studies that have used multiple home readings to express the true BP have found that home BP predicts risk better than office BP (Class IIa; Level of Evidence A). This call-to-action article makes the following recommendations: (1) It is recommended that HBPM should become a routine component of BP measurement in the majority of patients with known or suspected hypertension; (2) Patients should be advised to purchase oscillometric monitors that measure BP on the upper arm with an appropriate cuff size and that have been shown to be accurate according to standard international protocols. They should be shown how to use them by their healthcare providers; (3) Two to 3 readings should be taken while the subject is resting in the seated position, both in the morning and at night, over a period of 1 week. A total of ≥12 readings are recommended for making clinical decisions; (4) HBPM is indicated in patients with newly diagnosed or suspected hypertension, in whom it may distinguish between white-coat and sustained hypertension. If the results are equivocal, ambulatory BP monitoring may help to establish the diagnosis; (5) In patients with prehypertension, HBPM may be useful for detecting masked hypertension; (6) HBPM is recommended for evaluating the response to any type of antihypertensive treatment and may improve adherence; (7) The target HBPM goal for treatment is <135/85 mm Hg or <130/80 mm Hg in high-risk patients; (8) HBPM is useful in the elderly, in whom both BP variability and the white-coat effect are increased; (9) HBPM is of value in patients with diabetes, in whom tight BP control is of paramount importance; (10) Other populations in whom HBPM may be beneficial include pregnant women, children, and patients with kidney disease; and (11) HBPM has the potential to improve the quality of care while reducing costs and should be reimbursed. (Hypertension. 2008;52:10-29.)

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 · 10.1161/hypertensionaha.107.189010

Cites

177 of 177 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 177 references

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)70151-3 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1161/hyp.36.4.484 · doi:10.1161/hyp.36.4.484
  3. 10.1097/00004872-198812040-00117 · doi:10.1097/00004872-198812040-00117
  4. 10.1161/hyp.25.2.294 · doi:10.1161/hyp.25.2.294
  5. 10.1161/circ.104.12.1385 · doi:10.1161/circ.104.12.1385
  6. 10.1161/hyp.34.2.261 · doi:10.1161/hyp.34.2.261
  7. 10.2337/diacare.26.8.2473 · doi:10.2337/diacare.26.8.2473
  8. 10.1097/01.hjh.0000242397.53214.27 · DOI
  9. 10.1097/01.hjh.0000242409.65783.fb · DOI
  10. 10.1161/circ.95.6.1464 · doi:10.1161/circ.95.6.1464
  11. 10.1016/S0895-7061(04)00867-2 · doi:10.1016/s0895-7061(04)00867-2
  12. 10.1111/j.1524-6175.2005.04088.x · doi:10.1111/j.1524-6175.2005.04088.x
  13. 10.1016/S0002-9378(11)90660-7 · doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(11)90660-7
  14. 10.1111/j.1524-6175.2005.05123.x · doi:10.1111/j.1524-6175.2005.05123.x
  15. 10.1016/S0025-6196(11)62954-6 · DOI
  16. 10.3122/jabfm.12.2.105 · doi:10.3122/jabfm.12.2.105

Cited by

See all 668

Metadata

Authors
Pickering, T. G., Miller, N. H., Ogedegbe, G., Krakoff, L. R., Artinian, N. T., & Goff, D.
Venue
Hypertension
Published
2008-07
Volume
52
Issue
1
Pages
10-29
ISSN
  • 0194-911X (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4563
OpenAlex
W2101062299
Cited by
668
References
177
FWCI
43.56
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: Call to Action on Use and Reimbursement for Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: A Joint Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association, American Society of Hypertension, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/hypertensionaha.107.189010
The paper
Pickering, T. G., Miller, N. H., Ogedegbe, G., Krakoff, L. R., Artinian, N. T., & Goff, D. (2008). Call to Action on Use and Reimbursement for Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: A Joint Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association, American Society of Hypertension, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association. Hypertension. https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.107.189010

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.