↓ Skip to main content

The case for home monitoring in hypertension

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, September 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
The case for home monitoring in hypertension
Published in
BMC Medicine, September 2010
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-8-55
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul L Padfield

Abstract

Although the assessment of cardiovascular risk in individual patients takes into account a range of risk factors, the diagnosis and management of hypertension (high blood pressure) is largely determined by a single numerical value, albeit that often several readings are taken over time. Given the critical impact of a decision to embark on lifelong drug therapy, the importance of ensuring that a blood pressure (BP) record is both accurate and representative is clear. However, there is good evidence that the variability of BP is such that even if measurement is of the highest quality, it can be difficult to say with confidence whether a patient is above or below a treatment threshold. This commentary argues that current BP measurement is inadequate to make the clinical decisions that are necessary and that multiple readings are required to deliver an acceptable degree of accuracy for safe decision-making. This is impractical in a doctor's surgery, and the only realistic long-term strategy is to involve the patient in measuring his or her own BP in their own environment. Evidence is presented that such a strategy is better able to predict risk, is cost-effective for diagnosing hypertension, can improve BP control and is thus better able to protect individuals in the future. In this commentary, I explain why doctors and other healthcare professionals should increase their familiarity with the technology, be aware of its strengths and limitations and work with patients as they become more empowered in the management of their chronic condition, hypertension.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 4%
Unknown 27 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 29%
Researcher 5 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Professor 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 2 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 46%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 7%
Computer Science 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 3 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 15 September 2012.
All research outputs
#3,236,119
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,846
of 3,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,266
of 98,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#12
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,398 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 98,286 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.