↓ Skip to main content

Central blood pressure measurement may improve risk stratification

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Human Hypertension, July 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Central blood pressure measurement may improve risk stratification
Published in
Journal of Human Hypertension, July 2008
DOI 10.1038/jhh.2008.71
Pubmed ID
Authors

J E Sharman, M Stowasser, R G Fassett, T H Marwick, S S Franklin

Abstract

Central systolic blood pressure (SBP) may differ between individuals with similar brachial SBP, which may have implications for risk assessment. This study aimed to determine the variation and potential clinical value of central SBP between patients with similar brachial SBP. Brachial SBP was measured by sphygmomanometer and central SBP by radial tonometry in 675 people (430 men), comprising healthy individuals (n = 222), patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease (n = 229) and diabetes (n = 224). Individuals were stratified by brachial SBP in accordance with European Society of Hypertension guidelines (optimal, normal, high-normal, grades 1, 2 and 3 hypertension). The potential clinical value of central SBP was determined from the percentage of patients re-classified into different brachial SBP groups due to the difference between brachial and aortic SBP (defined as brachial SBP-central SBP). Central SBP increased with each brachial SBP level (optimal to grade 3 hypertension; P < 0.001 for all). However, large variation in brachial-aortic SBP difference occurred within each brachial SBP group (range 2-33 mm Hg), resulting in sizeable overlap of central SBP between brachial SBP groups. For patients with normal brachial SBP, 96% had central SBP within the range of patients with high-normal brachial SBP, as well as 64% within the range of patients with grade 1 hypertension. We conclude that wide variation in brachial-aortic SBP difference occurs between patients with similar brachial SBP. This results in a significant overlap of central SBP scores between brachial SBP risk groups. This is likely to have treatment implications but remains to be tested.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Israel 1 2%
India 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 45 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 27%
Researcher 12 24%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 14%
Engineering 7 14%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Chemistry 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 10 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 August 2008.
All research outputs
#15,240,835
of 22,660,862 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Human Hypertension
#1,031
of 1,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,345
of 81,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Human Hypertension
#11
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,660,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,358 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 81,682 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.