Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35686042›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022

Derivation and Validation of a Screening Model for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Based on Electrocardiogram Features.

Lanyan Guo, Chao Gao, Weiping Yang, Zhiling Ma, Mengyao Zhou, Jianzheng Liu, Hong Shao, Bo Wang, Guangyu Hu, Hang Zhao and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lanyan GuoDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Chao GaoDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Weiping YangDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Zhiling MaDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Mengyao ZhouDepartment of Ultrasound, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Jianzheng LiuDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Hong ShaoDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Bo WangDepartment of Ultrasound, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Guangyu HuDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Hang ZhaoDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Ling ZhangDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Xiong GuoDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Chong HuangDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Zhe CuiDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Dandan SongDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Fangfang SunDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Liwen LiuDepartment of Ultrasound, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Fuyang ZhangDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Ling TaoDepartment of Cardiology, Xijing Hospital, The Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Xijing Hospital · CNAir Force Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a widely distributed, but clinically heterogeneous genetic heart disease, affects approximately 20 million people worldwide. Nowadays, HCM is treatable with the advancement of medical interventions. However, due to occult clinical presentations and a lack of easy, inexpensive, and widely popularized screening approaches in the general population, 80-90% HCM patients are not clinically identifiable, which brings certain safety hazards could have been prevented. The majority HCM patients showed abnormal and diverse electrocardiogram (ECG) presentations, it is unclear which ECG parameters are the most efficient for HCM screening. Objective: We aimed to develop a pragmatic prediction model based on the most common ECG features to screen for HCM. Methods: Between April 1st and September 30th, 2020, 423 consecutive subjects from the International Cooperation Center for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy of Xijing Hospital [172 HCM patients, 251 participants without left ventricular hypertrophy (non-HCM)] were prospectively included in the training cohort. Between January 4th and February 30th, 2021, 163 participants from the same center were included in the temporal internal validation cohort (62 HCM patients, 101 non-HCM participants). External validation was performed using retrospectively collected ECG data from Xijing Hospital (3,232 HCM ECG samples from January 1st, 2000, to March 31st, 2020; 95,184 non-HCM ECG samples from January 1st to December 31st, 2020). The C-statistic was used to measure the discriminative ability of the model. Results: Among 30 ECG features examined, all except abnormal Q wave significantly differed between the HCM patients and non-HCM comparators. After several independent feature selection approaches and model evaluation, we included only two ECG features, T wave inversion (TWI) and the amplitude of S wave in lead V1 (SV1), in the HCM prediction model. The model showed a clearly useful discriminative performance (C-statistic > 0.75) in the training [C-statistic 0.857 (0.818-0.896)], and temporal validation cohorts [C-statistic 0.871 (0.812-0.930)]. In the external validation cohort, the C-statistic of the model was 0.833 [0.825-0.841]. A browser-based calculator was generated accordingly. Conclusion: The pragmatic model established using only TWI and SV1 may be helpful for predicting the probability of HCM and shows promise for use in population-based HCM screening.

Indexed as

C-statisticelectrocardiogram (ECG)hypertrophic cardiomyopathyleft ventricular hypertrophyscreening model

Identifiers

PMID35686042
PMCPMC9170889
OpenAlexW4281382894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.