Validation of the BIOS BD240 home blood pressure monitor in a multi-racial, multi-morbid Canadian population according to the International Standards Organization 2018 Protocol
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Assess the accuracy of the BIOS BD240 home blood pressure (BP) monitor and wide-range cuff according to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 2018 standard. METHODS: Eighty-five subjects (aged ≥18 y) with arm circumferences between 24 and 43 cm were studied. Blinded, two-observer, mercury-based auscultation performed using a two-piece cuff chosen for upper arm size was used for reference measurements. Accuracy criteria 1 and 2 of the ISO standard were determined and Bland-Altman plots generated. RESULTS: Sixty percent of the study sample was female and 42% had hypertension. Mean device-to-reference standard differences in SBP/DBP were 0.0 ± 6.2/-0.2 ± 6.3 for criterion 1 and 0.0 ± 4.8/-0.2 ± 5.8 for criterion 2. CONCLUSION: The BIOS BD240 passed the requirements of the American National Standards Institute/Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/ISO standard for both SBP and DBP and can be recommended for use.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it