ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2024
Assessing the repeatability, reliability, and precision of right ventricular outflow tract and mid-pulmonary artery diameters, velocity time integrals, and agreement between site-specific stroke volumes.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRight ventricular (RV) stroke volume (SV) can be calculated via Doppler echocardiography at multiple sites in the right chambers. However, the agreement between the calculated SVs at these sites is unknown. We aimed to assess the repeatability, reliability, and precision of the distal right ventricular outflow tract diameter (RVOTD), the mid-pulmonary artery diameter (MPAD), the right ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral (VTI), and the mid-pulmonary artery velocity time integral (MPAVTI). Additionally, we evaluated the agreement between RVOTSV and MPASV.
methodsFour observers each evaluated approximately 100 patients (n = 406). Basic measurements were made over three cardiac cycles, and the repeatability, reliability, and precision of the measurements were calculated. The agreement between the two methods was presented as intraclass correlation coefficients.
resultsThe repeatability coefficient ranges for RVOTD, MPAD, RVOTVTI, and MPAVTI were 2-3 mm, 2-4 mm, 2.1-2.8 cm, and 2.4-4.1 cm, respectively. The minimal detectable change ranges for these variables were 2-4 mm, 2-5 mm, 2.2-3.0 cm, and 2.6-4.3 cm, respectively. The respective precision ranges for RVOTD, MPAD, RVOTVTI, and MPAVTI were 2.7-4.7%, 2.4-5.4%, 5.0-7.4%, and 5.4-9.2%. There were significant correlations and agreements between MPASV and RVOTSV, with the Pearson correlation coefficient ranging from 0.63 to 0.89 (P < 0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficient ranged from 0.56 to 0.89 (P < 0.001), although there was a significant bias of 1.9-11.3 mL (P < 0.001).
conclusionsThe RVOTD, MPAD, RVOTVTI, and MPAVTI measurements were repeatable, reliable, and precise. The agreement between RVOTSV and MPASV ranged from fair to excellent, although significant bias, along with a wide limit of agreement, was observed. Consequently, these methods cannot be used interchangeably.
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.