Well, this is certainly going into my mental "small-talk at the doctor's office" folder. I would assume that there's no (good) way to directly compare traditio

Well, this is certainly going into my mental "small-talk at the doctor's office" folder. I would assume that there's no (good) way to directly compare traditional readings with lying-down readings, so some longitudinal studies (of the same person/people as time passes) would need to continue taking upright data samples, even if a new stream of data from the lying-down method is added as well. > The authors note that in the ARIC study, lying-down readings were done after a 20-minute rest period in that position. The need for a bed (rather than a chair) and more time (20 minutes vs 5) might be a small barrier to adoption, since it could impact how many patients can be processed per time.