ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2025
An advanced vision of magnetocardiography as an unrivalled method for a more comprehensive non-invasive clinical electrophysiological assessment.
Article in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Magnetic field based investigation of Brugada syndrome.European biophysics journal : EBJ · 2026Article
- Progress in Clinical Magnetocardiography: The Contactless Breakthrough for Noninvasive Clinical Detection of Cardiac Ischemia Now Needs Worldwide Standardization.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Non-Invasive Mapping of Ventricular Action Potential Reconstructed from Contactless Magnetocardiographic Recordings in Intact and Conscious Guinea Pigs.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
- Non-invasive mapping of ventricular action potential waveforms reconstructed from clinical unshielded magnetocardiography. Potential diagnostic application and current limitations.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decades of experimental and clinical studies, along with the most recent clinical trials, have demonstrated the diagnostic potential of magnetocardiography, particularly for the non-invasive early diagnosis of myocardial ischemia. It has also proven to be a valuable clinical tool for monitoring fetal well-being, normal growth, prenatal arrhythmias, and risk markers for sudden death. Such applications have recently received official recognition from Health Canada and the American Heart Association. This unquestionable success, and the additional evidence of magnetocardiography's high sensitivity in diagnosing infiltrative and inflammatory cardiomyopathies, has sparked renewed interest among clinicians. However, while these aforementioned applications are likely to significantly influence the broader clinical adoption of magnetocardiography, the general focus on these areas has shifted attention away from what we have always regarded as the fundamental strength of contactless cardiac magnetic field mapping: its unique ability to bridge the gap between experimental electrophysiology at the cellular level and non-invasive clinical assessments of human electrophysiology. This review aims to engage readers by sharing our vision, experience, and several key research milestones, emphasizing the lesser-explored yet significant potential of magnetocardiography. Specifically, it highlights its unique capability to detect electrically silent phenomena that may be critical for the timely and accurate identification of arrhythmogenic focal electrotonic and vortex currents, which can trigger or sustain life-threatening arrhythmias.
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.