Literature DB >> 25548966

Evaluating measurement error in readings of blood pressure for adolescents and young adults.

Shawn Bauldry1, Kenneth A Bollen, Linda S Adair.   

Abstract

Readings of blood pressure are known to be subject to measurement error, but the optimal method for combining multiple readings is unknown. This study assesses different sources of measurement error in blood pressure readings and assesses methods for combining multiple readings using data from a sample of adolescents/young adults who were part of a longitudinal epidemiological study based in Cebu, Philippines. Three sets of blood pressure readings were collected at 2-year intervals for 2127 adolescents and young adults as part of the Cebu National Longitudinal Health and Nutrition Study. Multi-trait, multi-method (MTMM) structural equation models in different groups were used to decompose measurement error in the blood pressure readings into systematic and random components and to examine patterns in the measurement across males and females and over time. The results reveal differences in the measurement properties of blood pressure readings by sex and over time that suggest the combination of multiple readings should be handled separately for these groups at different time points. The results indicate that an average (mean) of the blood pressure readings has high validity relative to a more complicated factor-score-based linear combination of the readings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blood pressure; blood pressure readings; measurement error

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25548966      PMCID: PMC4355040          DOI: 10.3109/08037051.2014.986952

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Blood Press        ISSN: 0803-7051            Impact factor:   2.835


  10 in total

1.  Using structural equation models to evaluate the magnitude of measurement error in blood pressure.

Authors:  J M Batista-Foguet; G Coenders; M A Ferragud
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2001-08-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Early versus late morning measurement of blood pressure in healthy men. A potential source of measurement bias?

Authors:  Johan Bodegard; Gunnar Erikssen; Leiv Sandvik; Sverre E Kjeldsen; Jørgen Bjørnholt; Jan E Erikssen
Journal:  Blood Press       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.835

Review 3.  Cohort profile: the Cebu longitudinal health and nutrition survey.

Authors:  Linda S Adair; Barry M Popkin; John S Akin; David K Guilkey; Socorro Gultiano; Judith Borja; Lorna Perez; Christopher W Kuzawa; Thomas McDade; Michelle J Hindin
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-05-27       Impact factor: 7.196

4.  Comparative fit indexes in structural models.

Authors:  P M Bentler
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 17.737

5.  Terminal digit preference in blood pressure measurements: effects on epidemiological associations.

Authors:  P A Hessel
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 7.196

6.  Blood pressure measurement error: its effect on cross-sectional and trend analyses.

Authors:  S Bennett
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  The value of two or three versus a single reading of blood pressure at a first visit.

Authors:  J Souchek; J Stamler; A R Dyer; O Paul; M H Lepper
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1979

8.  Comparison of three devices for measuring blood pressure.

Authors:  L Bassein; C Borghi; F V Costa; E Strocchi; A Mussi; E Ambrosioni
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1985 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Sources of measurement variation in blood pressure in large-scale epidemiological surveys with follow-up.

Authors:  Ulla Overgaard Andersen; Jens H Henriksen; Gorm Jensen
Journal:  Blood Press       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.835

10.  Impact of terminal digit preference by family physicians and sphygmomanometer calibration errors on blood pressure value: implication for hypertension screening.

Authors:  Theophile Niyonsenga; Alain Vanasse; Josiane Courteau; Lyne Cloutier
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 3.738

  10 in total
  2 in total

1.  Vagal Regulation of Cardiac Function in Early Childhood and Cardiovascular Risk in Adolescence.

Authors:  Meghan J Gangel; Lilly Shanahan; Jacek Kolacz; James A Janssen; Ashley Brown; Susan D Calkins; Susan P Keane; Laurie Wideman
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  2017 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 4.312

2.  Reflection on modern methods: five myths about measurement error in epidemiological research.

Authors:  Maarten van Smeden; Timothy L Lash; Rolf H H Groenwold
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2020-02-01       Impact factor: 7.196

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.