ArticleScientific reports2022
Modified precordial lead ECG SafOne on electrocardiography recordings.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adaptability in precordial lead placement is one of the sources of electrocardiography inaccuracy. The present experimental study aimed to investigate the modified precordial lead ECG SafOne on electrocardiography recordings. Fourteen subjects were selected using purposive sampling. All the artefacts that emerged in the ECG recording results from the subjects using both the modified precordial lead ECG SafOne and precordial lead standard ECG were measured and identified. Data were analysed using a t test to examine the difference in the artefacts from all ECG recordings. The electrocardiography recordings of males aged 21-25 years using modified precordial lead ECG SafOne showed that out of 168 precordial leads from 14 subjects, two indicated artefact images in lead II (1.19%) and three in lead III (1.79%). The statistical test showed no significant difference in terms of artefacts that emerged in the electrocardiography recording results from both standard ECG and modified precordial lead ECG SafOne (p = 0.096). The modified precordial lead ECG SafOne showed no significant effect on ECG recordings related to artefacts. Additionally, the precordial lead ECG SafOne had no substantial difference in the presence of artefacts compared to the standard ECG. Therefore, ECG SafOne was usable as an ECG precordial lead for electrocardiography recording.
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.