ArticleVeterinary research communications2024
Clinical evaluation of a digital stethoscope with simultaneous phonocardiography and electrocardiography in cats.
Article in Veterinary research communications, 2024. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A smartphone-based technology combining a digital stethoscope (DS) with simultaneous phonocardiography (PCG) and 1-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) is available. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the DS for the detection of heart disease in cats considering transthoracic echocardiography as gold standard. The study is prospective and observational inlcuding 42 client-owned cats. All cases underwent auscultation with a conventional stethoscope (CS), recording with the DS, 6-lead ECG and echocardiography. All the recordings were blindly reviewed. The agreement with standard methods was assessed using the Cohen's kappa and the Bland-Altman test. The Fisher's exact test was used to test the effect of shaving on tracings' quality. Intraoperator and interoperator variability were assessed with Cohen's k and Fleiss' k, respectively. Audio recordings obtained with DS were interpretable in 100% of the cats. The agreement between DS and echocardiography in detecting heart disease was substantial (k = 0.714), while between CS and echocardiography the agreement was moderate (k = 0.571). Intraoperator and interoperator agreement was almost perfect (k = 0.904; k = 0.867, respectively). The ECG tracings recorded with the DS were interpretable in 83% of the cats and the device was reliable in assessing basic ECG measurements. No significant differences were found in the quality of the audio and ECG tracings in relation to the shaving condition. Based on the efficacy of detecting cardiac murmurs and gallop sound, the DS can be considered a reliable tool for cardiac auscultation in cats, producing good quality audio and ECG tracings also suitable for possible remote interpretation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39607589What 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.