ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020
Assessment of Measurement Reliability for the IPN Test in Cardiac Patients.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiological diagnostics use maximal and submaximal tests with increasing load. Maximal stress tests are currently considered the gold standard. The Institut für Prävention und Nachsorge, Cologne (IPN) test may be an alternative when maximal patient load is not indicated. The universality of the test is well-documented in sport, but the reliability of this test is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess between-trial and between-day reliability for parameters assessed by the IPN stress test in cardiological patients.: In a study of 24 patients aged 39 to 79 years with cardiovascular diseases, the IPN cycle ergometer short test was performed (submaximal performance test). The reliability of heart rate, systolic and diastolic pressure, absolute power at submaximal load, relative performance at submaximal load and target heart rate were assessed. Good (Interclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) values ranged from 0.832 to 0.894) and excellent (ICC values ranged from 0.904 to 0.969) between-trial reliability was noted. Between-day reliability was good (ICC values from 0.777 to 0.895) and excellent (ICC values from 0.922 to 0.950). The obtained results suggest that the IPN test may be a reliable tool for use in the assessment of cardiological patients, avoiding the implementation of maximal efforts when excessive patient load is not recommended.
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.