ArticleWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2021
[Syncope in children and adolescents: are the current guidelines being followed?]
Article in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of neurally mediated syncope in children and adolescents (revised 2024).World journal of pediatrics : WJP · 2024Guideline
- Predictive value of EGSYS score in the differential diagnosis of cardiac syncope and neurally mediated syncope in children.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Clinical and Autonomic Profile, and Modified Calgary Score for Children and Adolescents with Presumed Vasovagal Syncope Submitted to the Tilt Test.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSyncope in childhood and adolescence is frequent and in most cases benign. A thorough history taking, complete physical examination, electrocardiography and further diagnostic work-up as indicated should rule out possible cardiac syncope.
objectiveTo evaluate whether the diagnosis of syncope was performed according to the currently valid S2k guideline. MATERIAL AND
methodsRetrospective study (January 2015-December 2017), University Children's Hospital of Saarland, Homburg, Germany. All patients aged 1-18 years presenting with the primary complaint of syncope were included.
resultsIn this study 262 patients presented with a history of syncope (161 female (61.5%), 101 male (38.5%), median age 12.5 ± 3.9 years). Of these, 183 (69.8%) were reflex syncopes, 36 (13.7%) presyncopes, 35 (13.4%) undefined and 8 (3.1%) cardiac syncope. Out of 262 patients, 43 (16.4%) were diagnosed in accordance with the published guidelines and 13/43 (30.2%) correctly received further diagnostic work-up. In 219/262 patients (83.6%) basic diagnostic testing was not sufficient and 135/219 (61.6%) were submitted to further unnecessary diagnostic tests.
conclusionBetter adherence to the syncope guidelines bears the potential to avoid unnecessary and costly auxiliary medical tests while correctly diagnosing patients with syncope.
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.