ArticleIEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine2018
Screening for Atrial Fibrillation During Automatic Blood Pressure Measurements.
Article in IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Atrial fibrillation detection in primary care during blood pressure measurements and using a smartphone cardiac monitor.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (Afib) contributes significantly to overall cardiovascular risk. Widespread screening for Afib in primary care is sometimes performed by palpation, but suffers from low accuracy and is dependent on clinician experience. Algorithms implemented on oscillometric blood pressure devices can detect Afib with high sensitivity and specificity, but information on factors affecting accuracy is scant. Concurrent diagnostic electrocardiogram (ECG) and oscillometry were measured in participants in ECG clinics at two sites. Root mean squared successive difference (RMSSD) and irregularity index (Irrx) were calculated from oscillometric data and used to train logistic regression classifiers. Monte Carlo cross validation with 20 splits was performed to estimate confidence intervals for mean sensitivity and specificity, with various weightings, in the absence or presence of ectopics, and with or without repeated measurements. 707 measurements, including 168 Afib, were collected from 569 participants with mean (standard deviation) age of 63 (16) years. Sensitivity/specificity of RMSSD and Irrx were 0.982/0.908 and 0.986/0.960 respectively when ectopics were included. Excluding ectopics from the data improved specificity by up to 5%. Nevertheless, based on this performance and after accounting for prevalence of Afib in the population aged over 60 years, and estimated costs of healthcare, oscillometric screening for Afib in this age group could return a positive net health-economic benefit.
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.