ReviewArrhythmia & electrophysiology review2022
Arrhythmogenesis of Sports: Myth or Reality?
Review in Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in the Monitoring of Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Athletes - State-of-the-Art Review.Vascular health and risk management · 2026Review
- Cardiovascular Remodeling and Potential Controversies in Master Endurance Athletes-A Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The Effect of Mental Training on Psychological Hardiness and Selected Personality Traits among Adolescent Male Volleyball Players.International journal of exercise science · 2025Article
- Wide Spectrum of Bradyarrhythmias and Supraventricular Tachyarrhythmias in Sportsmen: Run Forrest, Run?!Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Exercise-Induced Arrhythmia or Munchausen Syndrome in a Marathon Runner?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Does Myocardial Atrophy Represent Anti-Arrhythmic Phenotype?Biomedicines · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regular exercise confers health benefits with cardiovascular mortality risk reduction through a variety of mechanisms. At a population level, evidence suggests that undertaking more exercise has greater benefits. In the modern era of sport, there has been an exponential rise in professional and amateur athletes participating in endurance events, with a progressively better understanding of the associated cardiac adaptations, collectively termed 'athletes heart'. However, emerging data raise questions regarding the risk of potential harm from endurance exercise, with an increased risk of arrhythmia from adverse cardiac remodelling. Cross-sectional studies have demonstrated that athletes may exhibit a higher burden of AF, conduction tissue disease, ventricular arrhythmias, a cardiomyopathy-like phenotype and coronary artery disease. In an attempt to separate myth from reality, this review reports on the evidence supporting the notion of 'too much exercise', the purported mechanisms of exercise-induced cardiac arrhythmia and complex interplay with sporting discipline, demographics, genetics and acquired factors.
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.