Can auscultatory blood pressure normative values be used for evaluation of oscillometric blood pressure in children?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study was to analyze whether auscultatory normative values (Fourth Task Force [4TF]) can be applied to blood pressure (BP) obtained by oscillometric devices. The authors performed a retrospective analysis of oscillometric office BP and ambulatory BP monitoring in 229 children (116 boys), median age 15.31 years. Office systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) values were converted into Z scores using 4TF and oscillometric (German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescent [KiGGS]) reference values. There was good correlation between the two normative methods (r=0.9773 for SBP, r=0.9627 for DBP). Results from Bland-Altman test revealed only minimal differences in Z scores between 4TF and KiGGS for SBP, but a significant proportional error for DBP. 4TF and KiGGS Z scores were equally predictive of ambulatory hypertension. In conclusion, auscultatory and oscillometric normative data are interchangeable for SBP but not for DBP.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".