ArticleComputing in cardiology2018
The Reproducibility of Global Electrical Heterogeneity ECG Measurements.
Article in Computing in cardiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global electrical heterogeneity associated with drug-induced torsades de pointes.Heart rhythm · 2021Article
- Dynamic predictive accuracy of electrocardiographic biomarkers of sudden cardiac death within a survival framework: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2019Article
- Reproducibility of global electrical heterogeneity measurements on 12-lead ECG: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.Journal of electrocardiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGlobal electrical heterogeneity (GEH) is a useful predictor of adverse clinical outcomes. However, reproducibility of GEH measurements on 10-second routine clinical ECG is unknown.
methodsData of the prospective cohort study of incident hemodialysis patients (n=253; mean age 54.6±13.5y; 56% male; 79% African American) were analysed. Two random 10-second segments of 5-minute ECG recording in sinus rhythm were compared. GEH was measured as spatial QRS-T angle, spatial ventricular gradient (SVG) magnitude and direction (azimuth and elevation), and a scalar value of SVG measured by (1) sum absolute QRST integral (SAI QRST), and (2) QT integral on vector magnitude signal (iVM
resultsFor all studied vectorcardiographic metrics, agreement was substantial (Lin's concordance coefficient >0.98), and precision was perfect (>99.99%). 95% limits of agreement were ±14° for spatial QRS-T angle, ±13° for SVG azimuth, ±4° for SVG elevation, ±14 mV*ms for SVG magnitude, and ±17 mV*ms for SAI QRST. SAI QRST and iVM
conclusionReproducibility of a 10-second automated GEH ECG measurements was substantial, and precision was perfect.
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.