SynthesisBMJ open2023
Diagnostic accuracy of different ECG-based algorithms in wide QRS complex tachycardia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2023. 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.
- Atrial Tachycardia and Bundle Branch Re-Entry Ventricular Tachycardia With Similar QRS Complex Morphology.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- QRS complex configurations in 12-lead electrocardiograms of dogs with monomorphic ventricular tachycardia or complete bundle branch block.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSeveral ECG-based algorithms have been proposed to enhance the effectiveness of distinguishing Wide QRS complex tachycardia (WCT), but a comprehensive comparison of their accuracy is still lacking. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic precision of various non-artificial intelligence ECG-based algorithms for WCT.
designSystematic review with meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) are searched up to May 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: All studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy of different ECG-based algorithms for WCT are included. The risk of bias in included studies is assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tools. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Data were pooled using random-effects model and expressed as mean differences with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was calculated by the I
resultsIn total, 467 studies were identified, and 14 studies comprising 3966 patients were included, involving four assessable ECG-based algorithms: the Brugada algorithm, Vereckei-pre algorithm, Vereckei-aVR algorithm and R wave peak time of lead II (RWPT-II) algorithm. The overall sensitivity was 88.89% (95% CI: 85.03 to 91.86), with a specificity of 70.55% (95% CI: 62.10 to 77.79) and a diagnostic OR (DOR) of 19.17 (95% CI: 11.45 to 32.10). Heterogeneity of the DOR was 89.1%. The summary sensitivity of each algorithm was Brugada 90.25%, Vereckei-pre 94.80%, Vereckei-aVR 90.35% and RWPT-II 78.15%; the summary specificity was Brugada 64.02%, Vereckei-pre 75.40%, Vereckei-aVR 60.88% and RWPT-II 88.30% and the summary DOR was Brugada 16.48, Vereckei-pre 60.70, Vereckei-aVR 14.57 and RWPT-II 27.00.
conclusionsECG-based algorithms exhibit high sensitivity and moderate specificity in diagnosing WCT. A combination of Brugada or Vereckei-aVR algorithm with RWPT-II could be considered to diagnose WCT. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022344996.
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.