ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2024
National cost savings, operational and safety benefits from use of magnetocardiography in the assessment of emergency department chest pain patients.
Article in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 2024. 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.
- Progress in Clinical Magnetocardiography: The Contactless Breakthrough for Noninvasive Clinical Detection of Cardiac Ischemia Now Needs Worldwide Standardization.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Can magnetocardiography decrease ED overcrowding, increase hospital bed capacity, and save hospitals money?American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study objectives: Patients frequently present to the emergency department (ED) with chest pain requiring further risk stratification. Traditional cardiac diagnostics such as stress testing may expose patients to ionizing radiation, may not be readily available, may take significant time for testing and interpretation, and adds cost to the workup. Magnetocardiography (MCG) is an alternative approach to assess candidates more quickly and efficiently than routine downstream testing. Design: We created and ran 1000 trials of a Monte Carlo simulation. Using this simulation, we modeled the national annual impact by averting further cardiac diagnostics. Setting: All EDs in the United States. Participants: All ED adult patients with chest pain. Interventions: Simulated use of MCG to reduce avoidable downstream cardiac diagnostics. Main outcome measures: Our primary outcome was to estimate the impact of an MCG-first strategy on the annual national cost savings among eligible patients in the ED. Our secondary outcomes were the estimated reduction in short-stay hospitalizations, cancer cases, and cancer deaths due to radiation exposure. Results: An MCG-first strategy was estimated to save a mean (±SD) of $574 million (±$175 million) by avoiding 555,000 (±93,000) downstream cardiac diagnostic tests. This resulted in a national annual cumulative decrease of 500,000 (±84,000) hospitalizations, 7,600,000 (±1,500,000) bed hours, 409 (±110) new cancer diagnoses, and 210 (±56) new cancer deaths due to radiation exposure from avoidable cardiac diagnostics. Conclusions: If adopted widely and used consistently, an MCG-first strategy among eligible patients could yield substantial benefits by averting avoidable cardiac diagnostic testing.
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.