{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.00889248181083266, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.114942528735632, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Clinical Utility of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in Target Organ Complications and Equipment Choices

Although population studies have demonstrated a relationship between casual office blood pressures and target organ events, the variability of these blood pressure measurements for individual patients has generated an interest in the role of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring for defining the presence of hypertension and assessing the response to therapy. Noninvasive devices provide fewer data than intra‐arterial ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices, but are safer. No current noninvasive device performs well during ambulation. Rigorous evaluation of these rapid proliferating electronic devices is important, as would be the case with any new antihypertensive agent. Although ambulatory blood pressure measurements correlate better with target organ damage for groups of patients than do casual office measurements, the predictability and limited data on reproducibility for individual patients does not support widespread application for routine testing for hypertensive patients. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring should be viewed as a standard research tool for the evaluation of new cardiovascular drugs.