ReviewJournal of atrial fibrillation2019
Sudden Cardiac Death in Famous Athletes, Lessons Learned, Heterogeneity in Expert Recommendations and Pitfalls of Contemporary Screening Strategies.
Review in Journal of atrial fibrillation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The cost of caution: rethinking exercise in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2026Article
- Anesthetic Considerations in Athletes: A Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Novel cardiac myosin inhibitor for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.The Journal of general physiology · 2024Article
- Editorial: The role of sex in cardiac arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sudden cardiac death (SCD) in competitive athletes, though relatively uncommon, invariably leads to controversy. Specific limitations of an extensive screening process include lack of robust evidence to support prevention of SCD, poor cost-effectiveness and uncertain downstream implications of a positive screening test. An emerging body of evidence points to enhanced neurologically intact survival to hospital discharge when automated external defibrillators (AEDs) are used in a timely manner following sudden cardiac arrest (SCA). A viable alternative to an expansive screening process could be a robust secondary prevention system comprising of improvements in AED availability, stringent enforcement of CPR training in athletes and trainers to provide timely and effective resuscitation to reduce death following SCA. This strategy could widen the window to diagnose and treat the underlying etiology and prevent recurrence of SCA while also offering financial feasibility. Restricting athletes from competitive sports is a difficult decision for physicians owing to a lack of well-defined cutoffs for acceptable and prohibitive risk from pathology predisposing to SCD, especially in the absence of a protective medico-legal framework. In this review, we highlight a few cases that generated intense scrutiny by the public, media and medical professionals about the efficacy, feasibility and pitfalls of the existing screening process to diagnose cardiovascular pathology predisposing to SCD. Furthermore, contrasting approaches to screening, diagnosis and downstream workup protocols between the European Society of Cardiology and the American Heart Association are analyzed.
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.