ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2021
Heart Model
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantification of Cardiovascular Disease Risk Among Hypertensive Subjects in Active Romanian Population Using New Echocardiographic, Biological and Atherogenic Markers.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Clinical value of artificial intelligence 3D echocardiography in evaluating left atrial volume and pulmonary vein structure in patients with atrial fibrillation.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to explore the feasibility of HeartModel
methodsA total of 113 patients that underwent echocardiography in our hospital were eligible for inclusion. The HM 3DE (HM method) and conventional 3DE (3D method) were used to analyze echocardiography images. The HM was set to different border settings (end-diastolic [ED] and end-systolic [ES] settings) to assess different left ventricular systolic function parameters including left ventricular end diastolic volume (LVEDV), left ventricular end systolic volume (LVESV), and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and left ventricular diastolic function parameters including maximal left atrium volume (LAV
resultsThe differences in LVEDV, LVESV, and LVEF measured with different HM border settings were statistically significant (P<0.05) and were strongly correlated with the 3D method. For LVEF, the reading using the HM method with ED and ES = 70 and 30 showed the best agreement with the 3D method, and the difference in the readings was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). For LVEDV and LVESV, the reading using the HM method with ED and ES = 40 and 20 showed the best agreement with the 3D method, but the difference in the readings was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The measurements taken using the HM method were more reproducible than those taken using the 3D method (P<0.05). The measurement time when using the HM method was significantly less than the 3D method (P<0.05). In terms of LAV
conclusionEvaluation of the left ventricular function using HM 3DE is feasible, saves time, and is reproducible. To assess the left ventricular function, the border parameter setting of ED and ES = 70 and 30 provided the best fit for the Chinese population.
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.