Abstract TAC117: Evaluating Wearable Cuffless Devices for Nocturnal Hypertension: Accuracy and Usability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Nocturnal hypertension, defined as elevated blood pressure (BP) during sleep, is a stronger predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality than daytime hypertension. Although ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is considered the diagnostic gold standard, frequent cuff inflations can disrupt sleep, reduce comfort, and hinder adherence in clinical settings. Recent advances in wearable, cuffless BP monitors offer a promising alternative by enabling continuous, less intrusive measurements, potentially enhancing patient comfort and adherence. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that wearable, cuffless BP monitors accurately detect nocturnal hypertension and improve patient adherence compared to ABPM. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed and Google Scholar for studies published through January 2025 using keywords such as “blood pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory,” “Nocturnal Hypertension,” and “Wearable Electronic Devices.” Eligible studies compared wearable or cuffless BP devices with ABPM or other validated methods and reported diagnostic accuracy metrics or usability outcomes. Extracted data included study design, sample size, device type, measurement duration, BP differences, AUC values, and patient-reported outcomes. Results: Eight studies examined wearable, cuff-free BP monitors and found that their readings closely matched those from standard ABPM. Mean systolic BP differences ranged from −1.8 to 3.9 mmHg, and diastolic BP from −2.3 to 1.16 mmHg. Nighttime biases remained within clinical limits, with AUC values up to 1.0, indicating excellent accuracy. Technologies used included photoplethysmography, piezoelectric sensors, and ballistocardiography, which estimates BP through parameters like pulse transit time and pulse wave velocity. A pooled analysis of 16 studies (n=974) revealed small mean differences between wearable and reference devices, with average systolic and diastolic differences of 3.42 mmHg and 1.16 mmHg, respectively, supporting their clinical reliability. Usability studies reported improved comfort, fewer sleep disturbances, and higher adherence. Conclusion: Wearable, cuffless BP monitors offer high diagnostic accuracy and improved usability for detecting nocturnal hypertension. These devices show strong potential as alternatives to ABPM for routine clinical use and home monitoring. Further longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate their long-term impact on cardiovascular outcomes.
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 | 0.035 | 0.110 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".