ArticleScientific reports2022
An electrocardiography score predicts heart failure hospitalization or death beyond that of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and explanation of electrocardiogram-based deep learning for predicting short-term mortality in heart failure patients.Journal of global health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The electrocardiogram (ECG) and cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) provide powerful prognostic information. The aim was to determine their relative prognostic value. Patients (n = 783) undergoing CMR and 12-lead ECG with a QRS duration < 120 ms were included. Prognosis scores for one-year event-free survival from hospitalization for heart failure or death were derived using continuous ECG or CMR measures, and multivariable logistic regression, and compared. Patients (median [interquartile range] age 55 [43-64] years, 44% female) had 155 events during 5.7 [4.4-6.6] years. The ECG prognosis score included (1) frontal plane QRS-T angle, and (2) heart rate corrected QT duration (QTc) (log-rank 55). The CMR prognosis score included (1) global longitudinal strain, and (2) extracellular volume fraction (log-rank 85). The combination of positive scores for both ECG and CMR yielded the highest prognostic value (log-rank 105). Multivariable analysis showed an association with outcomes for both the ECG prognosis score (log-rank 8.4, hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.29 [1.09-1.54]) and the CMR prognosis score (log-rank 47, hazard ratio 1.90 [1.58-2.28]). An ECG prognosis score predicted outcomes independently of CMR. Combining the results of ECG and CMR using both prognosis scores improved the overall prognostic performance.
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.