English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective Blood pressure (BP) monitors are widely available and easy for patients to use. Systematic reviews [1-3] show that home monitoring of BP improves BP control but there is significant heterogeneity between studies, and meta regression has only been able to explain part of the heterogeneity, with concomitant interventions being a possible factor. Most evidence comes from trials of patients who have poorly controlled blood pressure at baseline, although not usually explicitly stated in trial or review title. However many hypertensive patients using home monitors may have BP below the recommended target Two large recent UK RCTs [4,5] have been carried out with very different inclusion criteria and interventions. The objective is to compare the main findings of these trials and assess how far difference between the trial populations might explain the apparent difference in the efficacy of the intervention between the two trials.

Generalisability of trials of home blood pressure monitoring; a comparison of two UK primary care trials