These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11798450)

  • 1. There is poor agreement between manual auscultatory and automated oscillometric methods for the measurement of blood pressure in normotensive pregnant women.
    Pomini F; Scavo M; Ferrazzani S; De Carolis S; Caruso A; Mancuso S
    J Matern Fetal Med; 2001 Dec; 10(6):398-403. PubMed ID: 11798450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Differences in blood pressure levels obtained by auscultatory and oscillometric methods.
    Weaver MG; Park MK; Lee DH
    Am J Dis Child; 1990 Aug; 144(8):911-4. PubMed ID: 2378339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Automated blood pressure measurement devices: a potential source of morbidity in preeclampsia?
    Quinn M
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1994 May; 170(5 Pt 1):1303-7. PubMed ID: 8178857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Inflationary oscillometry provides accurate measurement of blood pressure in pre-eclampsia.
    Golara M; Benedict A; Jones C; Randhawa M; Poston L; Shennan AH
    BJOG; 2002 Oct; 109(10):1143-7. PubMed ID: 12387468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Baseline check of blood pressure readings of an automated device in severe pre-eclampsia and healthy normotensive pregnancy.
    Ngene NC; Moodley J
    Pregnancy Hypertens; 2018 Apr; 12():47-52. PubMed ID: 29674198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparisons of auscultatory hybrid and automated sphygmomanometers with mercury sphygmomanometry in hypertensive and normotensive pregnant women: parallel validation studies.
    Davis GK; Roberts LM; Mangos GJ; Brown MA
    J Hypertens; 2015 Mar; 33(3):499-505; discussion 505-6. PubMed ID: 25380148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Accuracy of the Dinamap 1846 XT automated blood pressure monitor.
    Beaubien ER; Card CM; Card SE; Biem HJ; Wilson TW
    J Hum Hypertens; 2002 Sep; 16(9):647-52. PubMed ID: 12214262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Clinical assessment of the DINAMAP ProCare monitor in an adult population according to the British Hypertension Society Protocol.
    de Greeff A; Reggiori F; Shennan AH
    Blood Press Monit; 2007 Feb; 12(1):51-5. PubMed ID: 17303988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accuracy of oscillometric blood pressure monitoring in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia.
    Gupta M; Shennan AH; Halligan A; Taylor DJ; de Swiet M
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1997 Mar; 104(3):350-5. PubMed ID: 9091015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Validation of three oscillometric blood pressure devices against auscultatory mercury sphygmomanometer in children.
    Wong SN; Tz Sung RY; Leung LC
    Blood Press Monit; 2006 Oct; 11(5):281-91. PubMed ID: 16932037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Auscultatory versus oscillometric blood pressure measurement in patients with atrial fibrillation and arterial hypertension.
    Šelmytė-Besusparė A; Barysienė J; Petrikonytė D; Aidietis A; Marinskis G; Laucevičius A
    BMC Cardiovasc Disord; 2017 Mar; 17(1):87. PubMed ID: 28335730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. An accurate automated blood pressure device for use in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia: the Microlife 3BTO-A.
    Reinders A; Cuckson AC; Lee JT; Shennan AH
    BJOG; 2005 Jul; 112(7):915-20. PubMed ID: 15957992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of auscultatory and oscillometric blood pressures.
    Park MK; Menard SW; Yuan C
    Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med; 2001 Jan; 155(1):50-3. PubMed ID: 11177062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of Portapres with standard sphygmomanometry in pregnancy.
    Hehenkamp WJ; Rang S; van Goudoever J; Bos WJ; Wolf H; van der Post JA
    Hypertens Pregnancy; 2002; 21(1):65-76. PubMed ID: 12044344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of auscultatory and oscillometric automated blood pressure monitors in the setting of preeclampsia.
    Natarajan P; Shennan AH; Penny J; Halligan AW; de Swiet M; Anthony J
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1999 Nov; 181(5 Pt 1):1203-10. PubMed ID: 10561646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Validation of TM-2655 oscillometric device for blood pressure measurement.
    Kobalava ZD; Kotovskaya YV; Babaeva LA; Moiseev VS
    Blood Press Monit; 2006 Apr; 11(2):87-90. PubMed ID: 16534410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Validation of the Welch Allyn 'Vital Signs' blood pressure measurement device in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia.
    Reinders A; Cuckson AC; Jones CR; Poet R; O'Sullivan G; Shennan AH
    BJOG; 2003 Feb; 110(2):134-8. PubMed ID: 12618156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Automatic blood pressure measurement: the oscillometric waveform shape is a potential contributor to differences between oscillometric and auscultatory pressure measurements.
    Amoore JN; Lemesre Y; Murray IC; Mieke S; King ST; Smith FE; Murray A
    J Hypertens; 2008 Jan; 26(1):35-43. PubMed ID: 18090538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of automatic oscillometric arterial pressure measurement with conventional auscultatory measurement in the labour ward.
    Hasan MA; Thomas TA; Prys-Roberts C
    Br J Anaesth; 1993 Feb; 70(2):141-4. PubMed ID: 8435255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Validation of the Omron MIT Elite blood pressure device in a pregnant population with large arm circumference.
    James L; Nzelu D; Hay A; Shennan A; Kametas NA
    Blood Press Monit; 2017 Apr; 22(2):109-111. PubMed ID: 28151753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.