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 *

106 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2283674)

  • 1. Clinical evaluation of the sphygmomat 2 semi-automatic blood pressure monitor.
    Prior AJ; Peck K; Davies P; Beevers DG
    J Med Eng Technol; 1990; 14(6):250-3. PubMed ID: 2283674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical evaluation of the Copal UA-251 and the Dinamap 1848 automatic blood-pressure monitors.
    Maheswaran R; Zezulka AV; Gill JS; Beevers M; Davies P; Beevers DG
    J Med Eng Technol; 1988; 12(4):160-3. PubMed ID: 3193436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Inaccuracy of the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer.
    O'Brien E; Mee F; Atkins N; O'Malley K
    Lancet; 1990 Dec; 336(8729):1465-8. PubMed ID: 1979092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Random zero sphygmomanometer versus automatic oscillometric blood pressure monitor; is either the instrument of choice?
    Goonasekera CD; Dillon MJ
    J Hum Hypertens; 1995 Nov; 9(11):885-9. PubMed ID: 8583467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. High-fidelity digital recording and playback sphygmomanometry system: device description and proof of concept.
    Lee J; Chee Y; Kim I; Karpettas N; Kollias A; Atkins N; Stergiou GS; O'Brien E
    Blood Press Monit; 2015 Oct; 20(5):266-72. PubMed ID: 26075332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Clinical evaluation of the Nippon Colin BP-103N blood pressure monitor.
    Slabý A; Arenberger P; Josífko M; Hrabák P
    J Hum Hypertens; 1987 Jun; 1(1):13-6. PubMed ID: 3508193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of a new portable electronic sphygmomanometer (Copal UA251) with the Hawksley random zero machine.
    Malatino LS; Brown WC
    Clin Exp Hypertens A; 1988; 10(4):589-96. PubMed ID: 3390962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Using Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer as a gold standard may result in misleading conclusions.
    Conroy RM; Atkins N; Mee F; O'Brien E; O'Malley K
    Blood Press; 1994 Sep; 3(5):283-6. PubMed ID: 7866591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The accuracy of automated blood pressure measuring devices in patients with controlled atrial fibrillation.
    Stewart MJ; Gough K; Padfield PL
    J Hypertens; 1995 Mar; 13(3):297-300. PubMed ID: 7622850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of blood pressure measurements between an automated oscillometric device and a Hawksley random-zero sphygmomanometer in the northern Sweden MONICA study.
    Eriksson M; Carlberg B; Jansson JH
    Blood Press Monit; 2012 Aug; 17(4):164-70. PubMed ID: 22781634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An evaluation of the A&D UA-751 semi-automated cuff-oscillometric sphygmomanometer.
    Jamieson MJ; Webster J; Witte K; Huggins MM; MacDonald TM; de Beaux A; Petrie JC
    J Hypertens; 1990 Apr; 8(4):377-81. PubMed ID: 2160495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Does the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer underestimate blood pressure, and by how much?
    Mackie A; Whincup P; McKinnon M
    J Hum Hypertens; 1995 May; 9(5):337-43. PubMed ID: 7623370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Automatic measurement of blood pressure: evaluation of the Copal UA-231 automatic sphygmomanometer.
    Gallacher JE; Yarnell JW; Rogers S; Sweetnam P
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 1985 Sep; 39(3):220-3. PubMed ID: 4045362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The Dinamap 1846SX automated blood pressure recorder: comparison with the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer under field conditions.
    Whincup PH; Bruce NG; Cook DG; Shaper AG
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 1992 Apr; 46(2):164-9. PubMed ID: 1583434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of the random-zero and standard mercury sphygmomanometers.
    Parker D; Liu K; Dyer AR; Giumetti D; Liao YL; Stamler J
    Hypertension; 1988 Mar; 11(3):269-72. PubMed ID: 3280484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Clinical evaluation of Dinamap 845 automated blood pressure recorder.
    Silas JH; Barker AT; Ramsay LE
    Br Heart J; 1980 Feb; 43(2):202-5. PubMed ID: 7362713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Value of blood pressure of adults depending on method of measurement].
    Wielemborek-Musiał K; Jegier A
    Pol Arch Med Wewn; 2006 Jun; 115(6):529-34. PubMed ID: 17263224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Validation of the Artsana CSI 610 automated blood pressure monitor in adults according to the International Protocol of the European Society of Hypertension.
    Pini C; Pastori M; Baccheschi J; Omboni S; Parati G;
    Blood Press Monit; 2007 Jun; 12(3):179-84. PubMed ID: 17496468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Miniature electronic blood pressure monitor compared with a blind-reading mercury sphygmomanometer in pregnancy.
    Dawson AJ; Middlemiss C; Vanner TF
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 1989 Nov; 33(2):147-53. PubMed ID: 2583339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Validation of portable noninvasive blood pressure monitoring devices: comparisons with intra-arterial and sphygmomanometer measurements.
    Graettinger WF; Lipson JL; Cheung DG; Weber MA
    Am Heart J; 1988 Oct; 116(4):1155-60. PubMed ID: 3177191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.