ReviewJournal of clinical medicine research2015
Pre-participation and follow-up screening of athletes for endurance sport.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Brazilian Society of Cardiology and Brazilian Society of Exercise and Sports Medicine Updated Guidelines for Sports and Exercise Cardiology - 2019.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2019Guideline
- Specificity and Areas of Usage of Cardiovascular Prediction Models Among Athletes-State-of-the-art Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Evaluating the morphology of the left atrial appendage by a transesophageal echocardiographic 3-dimensional printed model.Medicine · 2017Article
- Article
- Detection of Common Respiratory Viruses and Mycoplasma pneumoniae in Patient-Occupied Rooms in Pediatric Wards.Medicine · 2016Article
- Observational
- ECG screening in athletes: optional or mandatory?Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2015Article
- Echocardiography in the evaluation of athletes.F1000Research · 2015Review
- Sports cardiology: lessons from the past and perspectives for the future.F1000Research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physical activity increases life expectancy and sport is a priori not harmful. Exhausted sporting activity (e.g. endurance running, triathlon, cycling or competitive sport) can lead under individual conditions to negative cardiac remodelling (pathological enlargement/function of cardiac cavities/structures) or in worst case to cardiac arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death (SCD). This individually disposition can be genetically determined or behaviourally/environmentally acquired. Overall competitive young male athletes suffer five-fold higher than non-competitive athletes from sudden death and athletes aged over 30 bear a potential for arrhythmias, atrial fibrillation or a 20-fold higher possibility for SCD as female athletes. Patients with diabetes, coronary disease, obesity or hypertension require different special managements. Screening of cardiorespiratory health for sport activities has a lot of faces. Basically there is a need for indicated examinations or possible preventive measures inside or outside of pre-competition screening. The costs of screening compared to expenditure of whole effort for sporting activities are acceptable or even negligible, but of course dependent on national/regional settings. The various causes and possibilities of screening will be discussed in this article as basic suggestion for an open discussion beyond national borders and settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.