ArticleCardiology journal2023
The comparison of Kardia Mobile and Hartmann Veroval 2 in 1 in detecting first diagnosed atrial fibrillation.
Article in Cardiology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of Machine Learning in the Detection of Atrial Fibrillation.Current cardiology reviews · 2025Pooled it
- A Missed Case of Vasospastic Angina, Clinched by a Personal Handheld ECG Device.JACC. Case reports · 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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the leading cause of stroke. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) advises opportunistic AF screening among patients aged ≥ 65 years. Considering this, the aim herein, was compare the feasibility of two different systems of smartphone-based electrocardiogram (ECG) recordings to identify AF among those without a previous arrhythmia history.
methodsProspective AF screening was conducted at six pharmacies using Kardia Mobile and Hartmann Veroval 2 in 1. A single-lead ECG was acquired by the placement of fingers on the pads. A cardiologist evaluated findings from both devices.
resultsAtrial fibrillation was identified in 3.60% and previously unknown AF was detected in 1.92% of the study participants. Sensitivity and specificity of the Kardia application in detecting AF were 66.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 38.4-88.2%) and 98.5% (95% CI 96.7-99.5%), and for Veroval 10.0% (95% CI 0.23-44.5%) and 94.96% (95% CI 92.15-96.98%), accordingly. Inter-rater agreement was k = 0.088 (95% CI 1.59-16.1%).
conclusionsMobile devices can detect AF, but each finding must be verified by a professional. The Kardia application appeared to be more user-friendly than Veroval. Cardiovascular screening using mobile devices is feasible at pharmacies. Hence it might be considered for routine use.
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.