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 *

207 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31764009)

  • 21. Comparison of aneroid and oscillometric blood pressure measurements in children.
    Eliasdottir SB; Steinthorsdottir SD; Indridason OS; Palsson R; Edvardsson VO
    J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich); 2013 Nov; 15(11):776-83. PubMed ID: 24112661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Are aneroid sphygmomanometers accurate in hospital and clinic settings?
    Canzanello VJ; Jensen PL; Schwartz GL
    Arch Intern Med; 2001 Mar; 161(5):729-31. PubMed ID: 11231706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Can electronic sphygmomanometers be used for measurement of blood pressure at high altitudes?
    Li S; Zhao X; Ba S; He F; Lam CT; Ke L; Li N; Yan LL; Li X; Wu Y
    Blood Press Monit; 2012 Apr; 17(2):62-8. PubMed ID: 22343751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. The random-zero versus the standard mercury sphygmomanometer: a systematic blood pressure difference.
    de Gaudemaris R; Folsom AR; Prineas RJ; Luepker RV
    Am J Epidemiol; 1985 Feb; 121(2):282-90. PubMed ID: 4014120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. [Comparative study on electronic sphygmomanometer and mercury sphygmomanometer among adults in the field study].
    Yu D; Li D; Guo Q; Yu W; Xu X; Zhao L
    Wei Sheng Yan Jiu; 2015 Nov; 44(6):914-7. PubMed ID: 26738382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Validation of Heine Gamma G7 (G5) and XXL-LF aneroid devices for blood pressure measurement.
    Dorigatti F; Bonso E; Zanier A; Palatini P
    Blood Press Monit; 2007 Feb; 12(1):29-33. PubMed ID: 17303985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Differences in orthostatic blood pressure changes measured with an oscillometric blood pressure monitor and a mercury sphygmomanometer.
    Iqbal P; Fotherby MD; Potter JF
    Blood Press; 1996 Jul; 5(4):222-6. PubMed ID: 8809373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Comparison of Dinamap PRO-100 and mercury sphygmomanometer blood pressure measurements in a population-based study.
    Ni H; Wu C; Prineas R; Shea S; Liu K; Kronmal R; Bild D
    Am J Hypertens; 2006 Apr; 19(4):353-60. PubMed ID: 16580569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Calibrating Local Population-Based Blood Pressure Data from NYC HANES 2013-2014.
    Kanchi R; Perlman S; Ostchega Y; Chamany S; Shimbo D; Chernov C; Thorpe LE
    J Urban Health; 2019 Oct; 96(5):720-725. PubMed ID: 31486004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. How well do clinic-based blood pressure measurements agree with the mercury standard?
    Kim JW; Bosworth HB; Voils CI; Olsen M; Dudley T; Gribbin M; Adams M; Oddone EZ
    J Gen Intern Med; 2005 Jul; 20(7):647-9. PubMed ID: 16050862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Validation of semi-automatic device UA-704 for self-measurement of blood pressure.
    Kobalava ZD; Kotovskaya YV; Rodionov E
    Blood Press Monit; 2005 Aug; 10(4):223-5. PubMed ID: 16077269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 'Legacy publication of a 2009 validation of the Riester Big Ben Square Desk aneroid device for blood pressure measurement according to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol for validation of blood pressure measuring devices in adults (2002)'.
    McNally RJ; Dunkerley J; Holland M; Eatough R; Lacy P; McManus RJ; Chapman N; Chowienczyk PJ; Lewis P; Clark CE; Denver E; Neary A; McDonagh STJ; Sheppard JP;
    Blood Press Monit; 2024 Aug; 29(4):203-206. PubMed ID: 38502042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Accuracy of automated blood pressure monitors.
    Nelson D; Kennedy B; Regnerus C; Schweinle A
    J Dent Hyg; 2008; 82(4):35. PubMed ID: 18755068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Home blood pressure measurement: validation of the Braun BP 2550 (UG) monitor according to the ESH International Protocol.
    Nolly H; Romero M; Nolly A; Osso P; Reinoso O; Nolly M
    Blood Press Monit; 2004 Feb; 9(1):53-8. PubMed ID: 15021079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Accuracy of sphygmomanometers at pharmacies.
    Erdem DG; Erdem E; Dilek M; Aydogdu T; Selim N; Demiray F; Sari A; Akpolat T
    Kidney Blood Press Res; 2009; 32(4):231-4. PubMed ID: 19622898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Comparison of auscultatory and oscillometric BP measurements in children with obesity and their effect on the diagnosis of arterial hypertension.
    Fonseca-Reyes S; Romero-Velarde E; Torres-Gudiño E; Illescas-Zarate D; Forsyth-MacQuarrie AM
    Arch Cardiol Mex; 2018; 88(1):16-24. PubMed ID: 28238543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Using semi-automated oscillometric blood pressure measurement in diabetic patients and their offspring.
    Kuo CS; Hwu CM; Kwok CF; Hsiao LC; Weih MJ; Lee SH; Ho LT
    J Diabetes Complications; 2000; 14(5):288-93. PubMed ID: 11113693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Alternatives to the mercury sphygmomanometer.
    Buchanan S; Orris P; Karliner J
    J Public Health Policy; 2011 Feb; 32(1):107-20. PubMed ID: 21109765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Type and accuracy of sphygmomanometers in primary care: a cross-sectional observational study.
    A'Court C; Stevens R; Sanders S; Ward A; McManus R; Heneghan C
    Br J Gen Pract; 2011 Sep; 61(590):e598-603. PubMed ID: 22152749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.