[2022] For a short explanation of why the committee made the recommendation for research, see the rationale and impact section on blood pressure targets for people with cardiovascular disease. Full details of the evidence and the committee's discussion are in the evidence review J: blood pressure targets. Rationale and impact These sections briefly explain why the committee made the recommendations and how they might affect practice. They link to details of the evidence and a full description of the committee's discussion. Diagnosing hypertension Why the committee made the recommendations Overall, there was limited new evidence on the accuracy of different methods of measuring blood pressure. Most of the studies identified were small, and the populations and protocols for measurement varied making interpretation difficult. However, the committee agreed that it was important to focus on the evidence from these more recent studies (post-2000) because the evidence should reflect the current use of electronic sphygmomanometers, which have replaced mercury-based sphygmomanometers. The evidence did not show that changing the current blood pressure thresholds for clinic measurement or home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) would improve diagnostic accuracy compared with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), so the committee agreed the 2011 thresholds for diagnosis should be retained. The committee noted that these are in line with most international guidance. Limited evidence suggested that clinic blood pressure measurement is less accurate than HBPM or ABPM when used to diagnose hypertension. The committee members acknowledged that these findings were in line with their clinical experience and agreed that clinic blood pressure measurement alone would not be an adequate method to diagnose hypertension. The committee discussed repeat clinic blood pressure measurements when there is a difference in blood pressure between arms and noted that clinical practice varied. 