Failure of plasma brain natriuretic peptide to identify left ventricular systolic dysfunction in the community.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiograms for identification of patients with low ejection fraction: a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial.Nature medicine · 2021
   Trial
2. Is B-type natriuretic peptide a useful screening test for systolic or diastolic dysfunction in patients with coronary disease? Data from the Heart and Soul Study.The American journal of medicine · 2004
   Trial
3. Natriuretic Peptide testing in primary care.Current cardiology reviews · 2008
   Article
4. The diagnostic accuracy and utility of a B-type natriuretic peptide test in a community population of patients with suspected heart failure.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2006
   Article
5. Screening for left ventricular dysfunction in the community: role of hand held echocardiography and brain natriuretic peptides.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2003
   Review
6. Value of plasma B type natriuretic peptide measurement for heart disease screening in a Japanese population.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2002
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as