Cited by 469Blood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy

A Universal Standard for the Validation of Blood Pressure Measuring Devices: Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization (AAMI/ESH/ISO) Collaboration Statement

Open access
Stergiou, George S., Alpert, Bruce, Mieke, Stephan, Asmar, Roland, Atkins, Neil, Eckert, Siegfried, Frick, Gerhard, Friedman, Bruce +16 more·2018·Hypertension

Abstract

In the past 30 years, several organizations, such as the US Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI), the British Hypertension Society, the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on Blood Pressure (BP) Monitoring, and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), have developed protocols for clinical validation of BP measuring devices. However, it is recognized that science, as well as patients, consumers, and manufacturers, would be best served if all BP measuring devices were assessed for accuracy according to an agreed single validation protocol that had global acceptance. Therefore, an international initiative was taken by the AAMI, ESH, and ISO experts who agreed to develop a universal standard for device validation. This statement presents the key aspects of a validation procedure, which were agreed by the AAMI, ESH, and ISO representatives as the basis for a single universal validation protocol. As soon as the AAMI/ESH/ISO standard is fully developed, this will be regarded as the single universal standard and will replace all other previous standards/protocols.

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.117.10237

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

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

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

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

Claims other papers make about this one

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

  • Because each unique automated BPMD can have different undisclosed algorithms, the accuracy of each BPMD needs to be individually determined by comparison to a BP reference standard using a scientifically accepted validation protocol.

    “Since each unique automated BPMD can have different processes, algorithms and fitting functions to derive BPs (none of which are publicly disclosed), the accuracy of each BPMD needs to be individually determined by comparison to a BP reference standard using a scientifically accepted validation protocol [14, 57, 58].”

    From Automated 'oscillometric' blood pressure measuring devices: how they work and what they measure (2022) · cites this paper as [57]

    The Objective calls for all BP measuring devices to be assessed for accuracy under an agreed validation protocol, and Validation Criteria and Reporting specifies comparison of test-device readings with reference readings. The paper does not say that each automated device uses different, undisclosed algorithms or that this is why individual validation is needed; searches for algorithms and device-model differences did not establish that rationale. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The validation standards used for cuff BP devices are not suitable for cuffless devices.

    “Importantly, the established validation standards used to evaluate the accuracy of cuff BP devices are inappropriate for cuffless devices58,59.”
  • The PAT-based blood pressure errors in n = 3 healthy normal subjects meet the tolerable error of 10 mmHg from consensus guidelines for blood pressure measurement systems.

    “meeting the tolerable error of 10 mmHg from consensus guidelines (32) for BP measurement systems.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [20]20. Stergiou GS, Karpettas N, Atkins N, O'Brien E. The European Society of Hypertension International Protocol for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices in adults. Blood Press Monit. 2012;17:45-47.
  2. [23]23. O'Brien E, O'Malley K. Blood pressure measurement: sources of error. In: O'Brien E, ed. Essentials of Blood Pressure Measurement. London, UK: Churchill Livingstone; 1981:42-43.
  3. [25]25. Boubouchairopoulou N, Kollias A, Atkins N, O'Brien E, Stergiou GS. Validation of blood pressure monitors using the AAMI and ISO protocols: an overview of their recent application. European Society of Hypertension 26th Meeting (Abstract). J Hypertens. 2016;34:e286.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stergiou, G. S., Alpert, B., Mieke, S., Asmar, R., Atkins, N., Eckert, S., Frick, G., Friedman, B., Graßl, T., Ichikawa, T., Ioannidis, J. P., Lacy, P., McManus, R., Murray, A., Myers, M., Palatini, P., Parati, G., Quinn, D., Sarkis, J., Shennan, A., Usuda, T., Wang, J., Wu, C. O., & O’Brien, E.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • University of Tennessee Health Science Center (US)
  • From the Hypertension Center STRIDE-7, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Third Department of Medicine, Sotiria Hospital, Athens, Greece (G.S.S.); University of Tennessee Health Science Center (B.A.); Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Berlin, Germany (S.M.); Foundation, Medical Research Institutes, Paris, France (R.A.); Medaval, Dublin, Ireland (N.A.); Clinic for Cardiology, Herz- und Diabeteszentrum NRW, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany (S.E.);...
Venue
Hypertension
Published
2018-03
Volume
71
Issue
3
Pages
368-374
ISSN
  • 0194-911X (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4563
OpenAlex
W2790385199
Cited by
469
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 60 · 2025: 83 · 2024: 71 · 2023: 69 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 14
FWCI
25.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Hypertension (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR-RP-02-12-015)
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/N025342/1)
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 › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Keywords
blood pressure measuring devices, device validation, validation protocol, measurement accuracy, international standardization, AAMI, European Society of Hypertension, ISO, hypertension monitoring
MeSH terms
Blood Pressure Determination, Europe, Humans, International Cooperation, Reference Standards, Societies, Medical, Reproducibility of Results, Blood Pressure Monitors, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Consensus

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