ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2021
Dynamic and conventional electrocardiograms for diagnosing arrhythmic coronary atherosclerotic heart disease: a comparative analysis.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Connection between heart rate variability alterations and cancer in tumor patients.World journal of cardiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to compare the clinical effects of dynamic electrocardiograms (ECGs) and conventional ECGs in the diagnosis of arrhythmic coronary atherosclerotic heart disease.
methodsFifty patients with arrhythmic coronary atherosclerotic heart disease admitted to our hospital from January 2019 to January 2020 were recruited as the study cohort. All the 50 patients were first diagnosed using conventional ECGs, and then they were diagnosed using 24-hour dynamic ECGs. The results of the conventional ECG diagnoses were taken as the control group, and the results of 24-hour dynamic ECG diagnoses were taken as the experimental group. The positive detection rates, the ventricular premature contraction rates, the supraventricular tachycardia rates, the atrioventricular block detection rates, the paired atrial premature beats, and the paired ventricular premature beats were compared between the two groups, and the diagnostic effectiveness of the dynamic electrocardiograms and the conventional electrocardiograms was analyzed.
resultsThe positive detection rate in the experimental group was significantly higher than it was in the control group (P<0.05). The atrioventricular block, paired atrial premature beat, and paired ventricular premature beats rates in the experimental group were found to be significantly higher (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the atrial fibrillation and premature ventricular beat rates between the two groups (P>0.05).
conclusionDynamic electrocardiograms are better for diagnosing arrhythmic coronary atherosclerotic heart disease than conventional electrocardiograms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34150179PMC8205682W3174859200What 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.