Abstract P2073: Blood Pressure Measurement: Should Technique Define Targets?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Advancements in technology over the last decades have brought a mini-revolution into the centuries old technique of blood pressure (BP) assessment. Automated oscillometric BP devices allow not only to eliminate human error in BP readings, but more importantly they standardize the length of resting period and allow for unattended resting and BP measurement. BP thresholds for definition of hypertension as well as BP treatment targets are however largely derived from studies using mercury sphygmomanometers or non-automated oscillometric BP devices. Comparative studies addressing the effect of standardized length of unattended resting and presence versus absence of medical personnel during BP measurement per se are however lacking. Methods and Population: In this prospective randomized, crossover trial we compared office casual BP readings to BP readings after 5 minutes unattended resting and unattended BP measurement. Additionally, we compared 5 minutes unattended resting and unattended BP measurement with medical personnel presence during BP measurement. BP readings were obtained from the same arm on 2 different visits using an automated oscillometric BP device (Omron HEM 907XL), one pre- and second one post 24-hour ABPM. All patients followed at our regional, tertiary care hospital-based Hypertension Centre were eligible for this trial. Results: 90 adult patients were consented and 79 (men 54% and women 46%) completed all the measurements. Mean casual BP was 137. 1 ± 16.7, mean resting unattended BP was 130.1 ± 13.7, indicating difference of 7.0 + 10.0 mm Hg (p < 0.0001). Mean resting attended BP was 129.3 ± 13.2 (not statistically different from completely unattended resting BP, difference - 2.7 [95% CI 1.4 -6.8] p = 0.18). Summary: Our study conclusively confirms that resting decreases blood pressure as assess from the difference between casual BP and BP obtained after 5 minutes of rest. More importantly, our study indicates that presence of medical personnel during BP measurements after initial 5 minutes unattended rest does not have a significant impact on overall resting BP readings. Conclusion: These data no superiority of fully automated devices versus semi-automated devices for BP measurements
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".