ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Preparticipation Cardiovascular Screening of Athletes: Current Controversies and Challenges for the Future.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in the Differential Diagnosis Between Athlete's Heart and Cardiac Pathology: Current Evidence and Diagnostic Challenges.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Fragmented QRS complex in athletes' electrocardiogram: physiological adaptation or pathological sign? A scoping review.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2026Review
- Epidemiology and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests at sport and recreational events in England, 2015-2022.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Preventing Sudden Cardiac Death among Athletes Using Echocardiography.Journal of cardiovascular echographyArticle
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sports cardiology is an evolving field in cardiology, with several topics remaining controversial. Beyond the several well-known benefits of regular exercise practice, the occurrence of adverse clinical events during sports in apparently healthy individuals, especially sudden cardiac death, and the described long-term adverse cardiac adaptations associated to high volume of exercise, remain challenging. The early identification of athletes with increased risk is critical, but the most appropriate preparticipation screening protocols are also debatable and a more personalized evaluation, considering individual and sports-related characteristics, will potentially optimize this evaluation. As the risk of major clinical events during sports is not zero, independently of previous evaluation, ensuring the capacity for cardiopulmonary resuscitation, especially with availability of automated external defibrillators, in sports arenas, is crucial for its prevention and to improve outcomes. As in other areas of medicine, application of new digital technologies, including artificial intelligence, is promising and could improve in near future several aspects of sports cardiology. This paper aims to review the methodology of athletes' preparticipation screening, emphasizing current controversies and future challenges, in order to improve early diagnosis of conditions associated with sudden cardiac death.
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.