Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29729877›Full record

GuidelineJournal of the American College of Cardiology2018

2018 ACC/HRS/NASCI/SCAI/SCCT Expert Consensus Document on Optimal Use of Ionizing Radiation in Cardiovascular Imaging: Best Practices for Safety and Effectiveness: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Expert Consensus Decision Pathways.

John W Hirshfeld, Victor A Ferrari, Frank M Bengel, Lisa Bergersen, Charles E Chambers, Andrew J Einstein, Mark J Eisenberg, Mark A Fogel, Thomas C Gerber, David E Haines and 12 more

Abstract readConsensus StatementPractice Guideline
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Guideline in Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Enhanced Radiation Protection Devices in Every Fluoroscopic Laboratory: A Call to Action.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Occupational Hazards in Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories: Radiation and Beyond-ANMCO Position Paper Update 2026.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026
    Article
  16. Zero/Low-fluoroscopy pulsed-field ablation approach: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors.

John W Hirshfeld
Victor A Ferrari
Frank M Bengel
Lisa Bergersen
Charles E Chambers
Andrew J Einstein
Mark J Eisenberg
Mark A Fogel
Thomas C Gerber
David E Haines
Warren K Laskey
Marian C Limacher
Kenneth J Nichols
Daniel A Pryma
Gilbert L Raff
Geoffrey D Rubin
Donnette Smith
Arthur E Stillman
Suma A Thomas
Thomas T Tsai
Louis K Wagner
L Samuel Wann

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Cardiac Imaging TechniquesRadiation ExposureHumansRadiation DosageRadiation InjuriesRadiographyRadionuclide ImagingACC Expert Consensus Documentnuclear cardiologypositron emission tomography radiationradiation riskradiation safetysingle-photon computed tomographyx-ray computed tomographyx-ray fluoroscopy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.