Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30644079›Full record

ArticleCardiology journal2021

Kardia Mobile applicability in clinical practice: A comparison of Kardia Mobile and standard 12-lead electrocardiogram records in 100 consecutive patients of a tertiary cardiovascular care center.

Lukasz Koltowski, Pawel Balsam, Renata Glowczynska, Jakub K Rokicki, Michal Peller, Jakub Maksym, Leszek Blicharz, Kacper Maciejewski, Magdalena Niedziela, Grzegorz Opolski and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiology journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06974006 (Integrated Monitoring for Independent Living in Rural Settings), which is not on this map. Cited by 35 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 5 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.

NCT06974006 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Integrated Monitoring for Independent Living in Rural Settings

TypeobservationalSponsorEuropean University Miguel de CervantesRan2025 to 2027Enrolled82ConditionsAged 60 Years or OlderArmsDevices: Kardia Mobile 6L, Omron M7 BP, Beurer PO30, Datospir Peak-10, NUTRILAB BIA 101 BIVA® PRO
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. A Pilot Study of the Home-Based 12-Lead Electrocardiogram in Clinical Practice.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Smart devices to measure and monitor QT intervals.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Lukasz Koltowski1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
Pawel Balsam1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland. pawel.balsam@wum.edu.pl.
Renata Glowczynska1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
Jakub K Rokicki1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
Michal Peller1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
Jakub Maksym1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
Leszek Blicharz1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
Kacper Maciejewski1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
Magdalena Niedziela1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
Grzegorz Opolski1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
Marcin Grabowski1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMobile devices are gaining a rising number of users in all countries around the globe. Novel solutions to diagnose patients with out-of-hospital onset of arrhythmic symptoms can be easily used to record such events, but the effectiveness of these devices remain unknown.

methodsIn a group of 100 consecutive patients of an academic cardiology care center (mean age 68 ± 14.2 years, males: 66%) a standard 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) and a Kardia Mobile (KM) record were registered. Both versions were assessed by three independant groups of physicians.

resultsThe analysis of comparisons for standard ECG and KM records showed that the latter is of lower quality (p < 0.001). It was non-inferior for detection of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter, showed weaker rhythm detection in pacemaker stimulation (p = 0.008), and was superior in sinus rhythm detection (p = 0.02), though. The sensitivity of KM to detect pathological Q-wave was low compared to specificity (20.6% vs. 93.7%, respectively, p < 0.001). Basic intervals measured by the KM device, namely PQ, RR, and QT were significantly different (shorter) than those observed in the standard ECG method (160 ms vs. 180 ms [p < 0.001], 853 ms vs. 880 ms [p = 0.03] and 393 ms vs. 400 ms [p < 0.001], respectively).

conclusionsInitial and indicative value of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter detection in KM is comparable to results achieved in standard ECG. KM was superior in detection of sinus rhythm than eye-ball evaluation of 12-lead ECG. Though, the PQ and QT intervals were shorter in KM as compared to 12-lead ECG. Clinical value needs to be verified in large studies, though.

Indexed as

Atrial FibrillationAtrial FlutterAgedElectrocardiographyHumansMalearrhythmiaatrial fibrillationelectrocardiogrammobiletelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID30644079
PMCPMC8276994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.