ReviewJournal of general internal medicine2022
Mobile Health for Arrhythmia Diagnosis and Management.
Review in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient Driven EKG Device Performance in Adults with Fontan Palliation.Pediatric cardiology · 2025Article
- Hybrid CNN-Transformer-WOA model with XGBoost-SHAP feature selection for arrhythmia risk prediction in acute myocardial infarction patients.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Advancing cardiac arrhythmia management: The integration of wearable technology and remote monitoring.World journal of cardiology · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Spandan Smartphone-Based Electrocardiogram for Arrhythmia Detection: A Cross-Sectional Study in a Large Patient Cohort.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2025Article
- Effects of Missing Data on Heart Rate Variability Measured From A Smartwatch: Exploratory Observational Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Observational
- Comparative Evaluation of Consumer Wearable Devices for Atrial Fibrillation Detection: Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- JCS/JHRS 2022 Guideline on Diagnosis and Risk Assessment of Arrhythmia.Journal of arrhythmia · 2024Article
- Research on Artificial-Intelligence-Assisted Medicine: A Survey on Medical Artificial Intelligence.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Wearable health monitoring: wave of the future or waste of time?Global cardiology science & practice · 2024Review
- Democratizing Health Care in the Metaverse: How Video Games can Monitor Eye Conditions Using the Vision Performance Index: A Pilot Study.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
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
Palpitations are a common symptom managed by general practitioners and cardiologists; atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in adults. The recent commercial availability of smartphone-based devices and wearable technologies with arrhythmia detection capabilities has revolutionized the diagnosis and management of these common medical issues, as it has placed the power of arrhythmia detection into the hands of the patient. Numerous mobile health (mHealth) devices that can detect, record, and automatically interpret irregularities in heart rhythm and abrupt changes in heart rate using photoplethysmography (PPG)- and electrocardiogram-based technologies are now commercially available. As opposed to prescription-based external rhythm monitoring approaches, these devices are more inexpensive and allow for longer-term monitoring, thus increasing sensitivity for arrhythmia detection, particularly for patients with infrequent symptoms possibly due to cardiac arrhythmias. These devices can be used to correlate symptoms with cardiac arrhythmias, assess efficacy and toxicities of arrhythmia therapies, and screen the population for serious rhythm disturbances such as AF. Although several devices have received clearance for AF detection from the United States Food & Drug Administration, limitations include the need for ECG confirmation for arrhythmias detected by PPG alone, false positives, false negatives, charging requirements for the battery, and financial cost. In summary, the growth of commercially available devices for remote, patient-facing rhythm monitoring represents an exciting new opportunity in the care of patients with palpitations and known or suspected dysrhythmias. Physicians should be familiar with the evidence that underlies their added value to patient care and, importantly, their current limitations.
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.