Patient Initiated Home Blood Pressure Recordings Are Accurate in Hypertensive Pregnant Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We undertook this study to determine the accuracy and reliability of patient initiated blood pressure measurement and recording. METHODS: We recruited 72 women from the antenatal hypertension clinic in a university teaching hospital. All were at high risk for preeclampsia and were asked to measure and record their blood pressure three times per day at home using a validated blood pressure device with an internal memory. RESULTS: From 979 measurements taken only 28 (2.9% were inaccurate). The inaccurate readings were restricted to three women. On further questioning two women admitted that the device had been used by other family members thus making comparison with the memory impossible. Thus the true nonconcordance rate amongst participants was 1/72 (1.4%). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that blood pressure recordings taken and documented by high-risk women at home are accurate. This allows more frequent measurements to be taken without the inconvenience of additional visits to hospital and may therefore lead to the earlier detection of preeclampsia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".