ReviewArrhythmia & electrophysiology review2024
Incidence, Risk Factors and Predictors of Phantom Shocks in Patients with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators: State-of-the-art Review.
Review in Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Next-generation ICDs: Individualised Selection for Improved Cardiac Outcomes.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2026Review
- When ICDs Do Not Deliver: The Unseen Burden of Untreated Arrhythmias.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2026Review
- New Diseases Related to Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs): An Overview.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Extensive research has been devoted to ICDs, but there is still a significant gap in the literature regarding phantom shocks (PSs). Understanding the frequency, predictors, risk factors, management and health implications of PSs is essential. This review aimed to comprehensively investigate PSs in patients with ICDs up to the present day. Specifically, the review explores the incidence of PSs, identifies risk factors that may increase their likelihood and determines predictive factors to help anticipate their occurrence. By addressing these points, the study aimed to enhance the understanding and management of PSs in ICD patients. Methods: This study reviewed central databases from their inception up to March 2024. The primary objective was to examine the occurrence of PSs in patients with ICDs. Data were gathered on patient demographics, incidence rates, and various risk factors and predictors that might affect the occurrence of PSs. Then, a detailed analysis of the collected data was conducted to identify significant associations between these risk factors, predictors and the incidence of PSs. Results: This review identified a significant association between prior ICD shocks, defibrillation threshold testing, the presence of depression and anxiety for the occurrence of PS in patients with ICDs. This underscores the importance of thoroughly evaluating and managing these factors to improve the care of individuals with ICDs. Conclusion: PSs are often associated with various factors, such as previous shock therapy, defibrillation threshold testing, depression, anxiety and higher levels of education. It is crucial for healthcare providers to acknowledge these correlations and provide personalised care to patients experiencing PSs.
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.