ArticleJTCVS open2022
Toward standard abbreviations and acronyms for use in articles on aortic disease.
Article in JTCVS open, 2022. 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.
- "No BLT": The Rise and Risk of Acronyms in the Medical Record.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2026Article
- Wnt16 Promotes Vascular Smooth Muscle Contractile Phenotype and Function via Taz (Wwtr1) Activation in Male LDLR-/- Mice.Endocrinology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: Academic medical literature is fraught with complex article-specific acronyms and abbreviations that can impair communication and make reading arduous. Our goal is to ease frustration with bespoke, inconsistent, and variable sets of abbreviations that currently exist for common aorta-related terminology (eg, anatomy, imaging, disease, and therapy). We hope to ease reading and improve communication in the aortic sphere of cardiovascular literature. Methods: We reviewed a total of 205 published references related to aortic disease, including a systematic review of aorta-related articles in the Results: We present suggested acronyms and abbreviations for common terminology related to the aorta. It is anticipated that this standard list will evolve over time as the literature and technology of the field grows and develops. Conclusions: A proposed standard set of acronyms and abbreviations for aorta-related terminology is provided that, if found useful, could be implemented broadly in the aortic literature.
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.