ArticleJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2025
Differences in Arrhythmia Detection Between Harvard Step Test and Maximal Exercise Testing in a Paediatric Sports Population.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cardiac evaluation of paediatric athletes.European heart journal · 2026Guideline
- From Preparticipation Screening to Diagnosis: Long-Term Outcomes of Athletes with Ventricular Repolarization Abnormalities and Normal Echocardiography.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Association Between Psychosocial Stress and Premature Ventricular Contractions During the Recovery Phase Following Treadmill Testing in Asymptomatic Individuals.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Comment on Bianco et al. Differences in Arrhythmia Detection Between Harvard Step Test and Maximal Exercise Testing in a Paediatric Sports Population.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
- Reply to Neunhaeuserer et al. Comment on "Bianco et al. Differences in Arrhythmia Detection Between Harvard Step Test and Maximal Exercise Testing in a Paediatric Sports Population.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSport practice may elevate the risk of cardiovascular events, including sudden cardiac death, in athletes with undiagnosed heart conditions. In Italy, pre-participation screening includes a resting ECG and either the Harvard Step Test (HST) or maximal exercise testing (MET), but the relative efficacy of the latter two tests for detecting arrhythmias and heart conditions remains unclear.
methodsThis study examined 511 paediatric athletes (8-18 years, 76.3% male) without known cardiovascular, renal, or endocrine diseases. All athletes underwent both HST and MET within 30 days. Absolute data and data relative to theoretical peak heart rates, arrhythmias (supraventricular and ventricular) and cardiovascular diagnoses were collected.
resultsHST resulted in a lower peak heart rate than MET (181.1 ± 9.8 vs. 187.5 ± 8.1 bpm,
conclusionsHST detects arrhythmias more effectively than MET in young male athletes, especially during recovery. More ventricular arrhythmias were highlighted even in athletes with cardiovascular conditions.
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.