ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2021
Preventing sudden cardiac death in young athletes - A perspective from the United States.
Article in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sudden cardiac death in young athletes is a rare, but devastating complication of several clinically silent conditions which can become unmasked during periods of intense physical activity. Prevention of sudden cardiac death starts with robust screening to allow the early identification of at risk individuals and the implementation of preventive strategies. The specific approach to screening (history and physical, with or without pre-participation electrocardiograms) varies across the globe with some notable differences between that used in Europe and the United States. The rationale for this variation is complex, but can be linked to the differences in risk factor prevalence, the healthcare infrastructure, and the capacity to identify and triage at risk individuals in a cost-effective manner. Beyond knowing the differences in the approaches to screening, establishing strategies that work (including novel techniques) and those that can be implemented in a successful and sustainable manner are key.
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.