ArticleBJGP open2025
Community-based cardiovascular risk assessment using the Cardisio
Article in BJGP open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessing the diagnostic accuracy of cardisiography in the diagnosis of coronary heart disease: CSG-DR study (A pilot study).Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) accounts for significant morbidity and mortality disproportionately affecting hard-to-reach individuals. New technology that enables community testing rather than attending hospital may address health inequalities and facilitate new care pathways.
aimTo explore whether the Cardisio test, which interprets three-dimensional vectorcardiography activity using a cloud-based artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm, can identify asymptomatic CVD. DESIGN &
settingProspective cohort study in three settings: general practice, pharmacy, and a community health centre. Recruitment targeted asymptomatic adults aged ≥18 years, with a QRISK3 score ≥10% or CVD risk factors.
methodA 10-minute test using five electrodes (four chest, one back). The Cardisio results are classified into red, amber, or green based on the Cardisio test's perfusion (P), structure (S), and arrhythmia (A) parameters. Pre- and post-test questionnaires provided feedback on participants' experiences. Results reviewed by a chief investigator ([CI] independent consultant cardiologist) and dealt with according to the study participants' results and medical profile.
resultsIn total, 628 tests were performed, 51% male (
conclusionThis simple, near-patient test afforded high-risk hard-to-reach individuals with access to an acceptable test that can facilitate appropriate referral. The automated test does not rely on interpretation of electrocardiogram (ECG) readouts and so is more effective at identifying underlying CVD than a traditional 12-lead ECG.
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.