ArticleJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance2025
Prospective electrocardiographic and cardiovascular magnetic resonance alterations in the UK Biobank coronavirus disease 2019 repeat imaging study.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 2025. 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
28 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and electrocardiographic (ECG) abnormalities after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are widely reported. However, the absence of pre-infection assessments limits causal inference from these studies. This study aims to compare interval change in CMR and ECG measures in participants with incident COVID-19 and matched uninfected controls in UK Biobank.
methodsUK Biobank participants with documented COVID-19 who had CMR and ECG performed before the pandemic were invited for repeat assessment, along with uninfected participants matched on age, sex, ethnicity, location, and date of baseline imaging. Automated pipelines were used to extract ECG phenotypes and CMR measures of cardiac structure and function, aortic distensibility, aortic flow, and myocardial native T1. Logistic regression was used to examine associations of baseline metrics with incident COVID-19. Standardized residual approach was used to compare the degree of interval change in CMR and ECG metrics between cases and controls.
resultsWe analyzed 2092 participants (1079 cases and 1013 controls) with average age of 60 ± 7 years. 47.1% were male. There was 3.2 ± 1.5 years between pre- and post-infection assessments. 3.6% of cases were hospitalized. Lower baseline left ventricular ejection fraction and worse longitudinal, circumferential, and radial strain were associated with higher risk of incident COVID-19. There were no significant differences in interval change of any CMR or ECG metric between cases and controls.
conclusionWhile pre-existing cardiovascular abnormalities are linked to higher risk of COVID-19, exposure to infection does not alter interval change of highly sensitive CMR and ECG indicators of cardiovascular health.
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.