↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Questionable accuracy of home blood pressure measurements in the obese population – Validation of the Microlife WatchBP O3® and Omron RS6® devices according to the European Society of Hypertension-Inte…

Overview of attention for article published in Vascular Health and Risk Management, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Questionable accuracy of home blood pressure measurements in the obese population – Validation of the Microlife WatchBP O3® and Omron RS6® devices according to the European Society of Hypertension-International Protocol
Published in
Vascular Health and Risk Management, February 2017
DOI 10.2147/vhrm.s126285
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alaa Azaki, Reem Diab, Aya Harb, Roland Asmar, Mirna N Chahine

Abstract

Two oscillometric devices, the Microlife WatchBP O3(®) and the Omron RS6(®), designed for self-blood pressure measurement were evaluated according to the European Society of Hypertension (ESH)-International Protocol (IP) Revision 2010 in the obese population. The Microlife WatchBP O3 measures blood pressure (BP) at the brachial level and the Omron RS6 measures BP at the wrist level. The ESH-IP revision 2010 includes a total of 33 subjects. The difference between observers' and device BP values was calculated for each measure. A total of 99 pairs of BP differences were classified into three categories (≤5, ≤10, and ≤15 mmHg). The protocol procedures were followed precisely in each of the two studies. Microlife WatchBP O3 and Omron RS6 failed to fulfill the criteria of the ESH-IP. The mean differences between the device and the mercury readings were: 0.3±7.8 mmHg and -1.9±6.4 mmHg for systolic BP and diastolic BP, respectively, for Microlife WatchBP O3, and 2.7±9.9 mmHg for SBP and 3.5±11.1 mmHg for diastolic BP for Omron RS6. Microlife WatchBP O3 and Omron RS6 readings differing from the mercury standard by more than 5, 10, and 15 mmHg failed to fulfill the ESH-IP revision 2010 requirements in obese subjects. Therefore, the two devices cannot be recommended for use in obese subjects.

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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Unspecified 2 9%
Professor 2 9%
Other 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 10 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 26%
Unspecified 2 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 10 43%
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 31 July 2019.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#675
of 804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#322,774
of 424,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 424,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.