Literature DB >> 8916764

Comparing hypertension guidelines. Technical difficulties may have affected study's results.

S Barton, M Cranney, T Walley.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh：

Year:  1996        PMID： 8916764      PMCID： PMC2352516          DOI： 10.1136/bmj.313.7066.1204

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN： 0959-8138


× No keyword cloud information.
  3 in total

1.  Quality assessment of blood pressure measurements in epidemiological surveys. The impact of last digit preference and the proportions of identical duplicate measurements. WHO Monica Project [corrected].

Authors:  H W Hense; K Kuulasmaa; A Zaborskis; W Kupsc; J Tuomilehto
Journal:  Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 1.019

2.  Terminal digit preference, random error, and bias in routine clinical measurement of blood pressure.

Authors:  S W Wen; M S Kramer; J Hoey; J A Hanley; R H Usher
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  What constitutes controlled hypertension? Patient based comparison of hypertension guidelines.

Authors:  T P Fahey; T J Peters
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-07-13
  3 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  Auditing the management of hypertension in British general practice: a critical literature review.

Authors:  M Cranney; S Barton; T Walley
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 5.386
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.