ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2025
A comparison of magnetocardiography with noninvasive cardiac testing in the evaluation of patients with chest pain.
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 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.
- 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 waveforms reconstructed from clinical unshielded magnetocardiography. Potential diagnostic application and current limitations.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of magnetocardiography as a non-invasive tool for functional assessment of myocardial ischemia in patients with stable coronary artery disease.Frontiers in medical technology · 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
Objectives: Chest pain is a common complaint of outpatients and emergency department patients. These patients are often referred for noninvasive cardiac imaging (NCI). Problems with NCI include limited availability, lengthy test delays, test duration, radiation exposure, adverse events, NPO (holding medications, caffeine/food/liquids/tobacco), exercise requirement, limitations for certain populations, inability to assess for ischemia with no obstructive coronary artery disease (INOCA), contrast/medication/needlestick-intravenous (IV) line needed.Magnetocardiography (MCG) advantages include faster, easier test administration, radiation avoidance, less resource utilization, safer, no needlestick/IV requirement, no NPO for caffeine/food/liquids/tobacco, and no holding medications. By avoiding medications and/or exercise, MCG avoids risk of provoking myocardial injury and dangerous events (arrhythmias). No contrast or pharmacologic agents are needed with MCG, eliminating side effects/complications: tissue necrosis from extravasation, contrast-induced nephropathy, allergic reactions including life threatening anaphylaxis. Design: MCG comparison with NCI: exercise stress test, stress echo, dobutamine stress echocardiogram, myocardial perfusion imaging: single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) or positron emission tomography (PET), cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI), coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). Outcome measures: Literature review: NCI versus MCG. Conclusion: MCG is a rapid, safe, effective, painless and radiation-free test, does not require contrast/medication administration. MCG by avoiding provocative medications and/or exercise eliminates the risk of provoking myocardial injury and causing dangerous events such as arrhythmias. MCG avoids testing delays, has higher patient satisfaction, no NPO requirement, no holding medications or caffeine/food/liquids/tobacco, with similar sensitivity and specificity. Additional clinical research is needed to validate its utility. MCG may be a complementary modality alongside current NCI.
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.