MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The 2020 “WHO Technical Specifications for Automated Non-Invasive Blood Pressure Measuring Devices With Cuff”

2021· article· en· W3126151802 on OpenAlexaff
Oommen John, Norm R.C. Campbell, Tammy M. Brady, Margret Farrell, Cherian Varghese, Adriana Velazquez Berumen, Laura A. Velez Ruiz Gaitan, Nicola Toffelmire, Mohammad Ameel, Mulugeta Mideksa, Marc G. Jaffe, Aletta E. Schutte, Taskeen Khan, Laura Patricia Lopez Meneses

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsStandardizationMedicineGovernment (linguistics)Health careCuffBlood pressureProtocol (science)Risk analysis (engineering)Medical emergencyComputer scienceSurgeryAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High systolic blood pressure (BP) is the single leading modifiable risk factor for death worldwide. Accurate BP measurement is the cornerstone for screening, diagnosis, and management of hypertension. Inaccurate BP measurement is a leading patient safety challenge. A recent World Health Organization report has outlined the technical specifications for automated noninvasive clinical BP measurement with cuff. The report is applicable to ambulatory, home, and office devices used for clinical purposes. The report recommends that for routine clinical purposes, (1) automated devices be used, (2) an upper arm cuff be used, and (3) that only automated devices that have passed accepted international accuracy standards (eg, the International Organization for Standardization 81060-2; 2018 protocol) be used. Accurate measurement also depends on standardized patient preparation and measurement technique and a quiet, comfortable setting. The World Health Organization report provides steps for governments, manufacturers, health care providers, and their organizations that need to be taken to implement the report recommendations and to ensure accurate BP measurement for clinical purposes. Although, health and scientific organizations have had similar recommendations for many years, the World Health Organization as the leading governmental health organization globally provides a potentially synergistic nongovernment government opportunity to enhance the accuracy of clinical BP assessment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0060.002
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.020

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations103
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207