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 *

249 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 4014120)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 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. Agreement of blood pressure measurements between random-zero and standard mercury sphygmomanometers.
    Yang W; Gu D; Chen J; Jaquish CE; Rao DC; Wu X; Hixson JE; Duan X; Kelly TN; Hamm LL; Whelton PK; He J;
    Am J Med Sci; 2008 Nov; 336(5):373-8. PubMed ID: 19011391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Properties of the random zero sphygmomanometer.
    Kronmal RA; Rutan GH; Manolio TA; Borhani NO
    Hypertension; 1993 May; 21(5):632-7. PubMed ID: 8491498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. [Mean blood pressure among the adults in China 2010-2012: based on the results of mercury sphygmomanometer and converted electronic sphygmomanometer].
    Yu DM; Fu P; Yu WT; Guo HJ; Yang XG; Zhao WH; Zhao LY
    Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2017 Oct; 51(10):933-938. PubMed ID: 29036997
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A perfect replacement for the mercury sphygmomanometer: the case of the hybrid blood pressure monitor.
    Stergiou GS; Karpettas N; Kollias A; Destounis A; Tzamouranis D
    J Hum Hypertens; 2012 Apr; 26(4):220-7. PubMed ID: 21900952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Comparison between blood pressure readings using a mercury versus an aneroid sphygmomanometer.
    Farhan K; Naqvi STS; Rizvi SAH; Zafar A; Rawala MS
    Blood Press Monit; 2020 Feb; 25(1):34-38. PubMed ID: 31764009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Can an automatic oscillometric device replace a mercury sphygmomanometer on blood pressure measurement? a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Park SH; Park YS
    Blood Press Monit; 2019 Dec; 24(6):265-276. PubMed ID: 31658107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison of two sphygmomanometers that may replace the traditional mercury column in the healthcare workplace.
    Elliott WJ; Young PE; DeVivo L; Feldstein J; Black HR
    Blood Press Monit; 2007 Feb; 12(1):23-8. PubMed ID: 17303984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Clinical blood pressure measurement verification when comparing a Tensoval duo control device with a mercury sphygmomanometer in patients suffering from atrial fibrillation.
    Farsky S; Benova K; Krausova D; Sirotiaková J; Vysocanova P
    Blood Press Monit; 2011 Oct; 16(5):252-7. PubMed ID: 21914986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of performance of various sphygmomanometers with intra-arterial blood-pressure readings.
    Hunyor SN; Flynn JM; Cochineas C
    Br Med J; 1978 Jul; 2(6131):159-62. PubMed ID: 678830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. [Consistency between the electronic and mercury sphygmomanometer in children and adolescents on blood pressure measuring].
    Cao Q; Li D; Yu W; Guo Q; Zhao L; Yu D; Wang Y
    Wei Sheng Yan Jiu; 2016 Sep; 45(5):758-765. PubMed ID: 29903127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Blood pressure monitoring with home monitors versus mercury sphygmomanometer.
    Rotch AL; Dean JO; Kendrach MG; Wright SG; Woolley TW
    Ann Pharmacother; 2001; 35(7-8):817-22. PubMed ID: 11485126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.