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 *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 493912)

  • 1. [Are automatic devices suitable for blood pressure determinations?].
    Adorjani C; Siegenthaler W; Vetter W
    Schweiz Med Wochenschr; 1979 Sep; 109(33):1225-30. PubMed ID: 493912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. [Comparative study of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitors with standard zero and random zero sphygmomanometers].
    Tislér A; Barna I; Châtel R
    Orv Hetil; 1994 Jun; 135(26):1415-9. PubMed ID: 8028897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Validation of two automatic devices for self-measurement of blood pressure according to the International Protocol of the European Society of Hypertension: the Omron M6 (HEM-7001-E) and the Omron R7 (HEM 637-IT).
    Topouchian JA; El Assaad MA; Orobinskaia LV; El Feghali RN; Asmar RG
    Blood Press Monit; 2006 Jun; 11(3):165-71. PubMed ID: 16702826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of two automatic blood pressure recorders and the mercury sphygomomanometer.
    Voors AW; Sklov MC; Halperin H; Webber LS; Berenson GS
    Hypertension; 1982; 4(2):329-36. PubMed ID: 7068191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Validation of TONOPORT V blood-pressure measuring monitor in adults.
    Haensel A; Utech K; Langewitz W
    J Hum Hypertens; 2005 Sep; 19(9):745-9. PubMed ID: 15951741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Validation of the Samsung SBM-100A and Microlife BP 3BU1-5 wrist blood pressure measuring devices in adults according to the International Protocol.
    Altunkan S; Ilman N; Altunkan E
    Blood Press Monit; 2007 Apr; 12(2):119-25. PubMed ID: 17353656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of Automated and Mercury Column Blood Pressure Measurements in Health Care Settings.
    Pavlik VN; Hyman DJ; Toronjo C
    J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich); 2000 Mar; 2(2):81-86. PubMed ID: 11416630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accuracy of an oscillometric automatic blood pressure device: the Omron HEM403C.
    Walma EP; van Dooren C; van der Does E; Prins A; Mulder P; Hoes AW
    J Hum Hypertens; 1995 Mar; 9(3):169-74. PubMed ID: 7783097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Oscillometric finger blood pressure versus brachial auscultative blood pressure recording.
    Iyriboz Y
    J Fam Pract; 1990 Oct; 31(4):376-80. PubMed ID: 2212968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Blood pressure self-measurement in upper arm and in wrist for treatment control of arterial hypertension compared to ABPM.
    Eckert S; Gleichmann S; Gleichmann U
    Z Kardiol; 1996; 85 Suppl 3():109-11. PubMed ID: 8896310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. The trained observer better predicts daytime ABPM diastolic blood pressure in hypertensive patients than does an automated (Omron) device.
    Graves JW; Grossardt BR; Gullerud RE; Bailey KR; Feldstein J
    Blood Press Monit; 2006 Apr; 11(2):53-8. PubMed ID: 16534405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Evaluation of the characteristics and performance of an automatic sphygmomanometer (Omega 1400)].
    Gigli G; Casu M; Paganini G; Colombano M; Campostano A; Merlo F; Lamedica G
    Boll Soc Ital Biol Sper; 1991 Mar; 67(3):245-51. PubMed ID: 1930899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Validation of the Braun BP 3550 wrist blood pressure measuring device with a position sensor and an EasyClick cuff according to the International Protocol in adults.
    Ilman N; Altunkan S; Kayatürk N; Altunkan E
    Blood Press Monit; 2007 Feb; 12(1):45-9. PubMed ID: 17303987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An evaluation of two indirect methods of blood pressure measurement in ill patients.
    Rebenson-Piano M; Holm K; Foreman MD; Kirchhoff KT
    Nurs Res; 1989; 38(1):42-5. PubMed ID: 2911511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. [How reliable is conventional blood pressure registration? Comparison with a semi-automatic device].
    Kolb C; Huss R; Mengden T; Vetter W
    Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax; 1991 Mar; 80(12):286-90. PubMed ID: 2028135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.