ArticleJournal of electrocardiology
Electrocardiographic criteria for silent myocardial infarction: Impact of different definitions on detection rates and prognostic significance in the atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) study: A comparison with evolving bundle branch blocks.
Article in Journal of electrocardiology. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIt is unclear how differences in the electrocardiographic (ECG) definition of myocardial infarction (MI) impact detection rates and prognostic significance of silent MI (SMI).
methodsThis analysis included 9188 participants (57.4 % women, 20 % black, age 62.6 ± 6.0 years) enrolled in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study who had serial ECGs obtained between visit 1 (1987-1989) and visit 4 (1996-1998). Exclusions included known cardiovascular disease (CVD) prior to visit 1, ECG findings of MI or bundle branch block (BBB) at visit 1, or an adjudicated fatal and non-fatal MI events between visits 1 and 4. Using the Minnesota Code (MC) ECG Classification and in the absence of adjudicated MI, the following SMI definitions were derived: Standard MC MI [major Q-wave abnormality, or minor Q-wave abnormality plus major ST/T abnormality], only major Q-wave abnormality, standard significant serial Q-wave changes [Q1 to Q7], expanded MC serial Q-wave changes[Q1 to Q8], standard MC significant serial Q-wave changes or Standard MC significant serial ST/T changes, and evolving MC BBB. Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the association of different definitions of SMI (compared to no new MI or evolving BBB) with fatal or non-fatal MI events ascertained after visit 4 until December 2016.
resultsThe prevalence of SMI ranged from 0.6 % to 7.0 % depending on the ECG criteria defining SMI. Presence of SMI was predictive of fatal/non-fatal MI regardless of the definition but with varying levels of association. Standard MC expanded serial Q-wave changes had the strongest adjusted relationship [Hazard Ratio: 2.53 (95 % Confidence Interval (CI): 1.60-4.01)] while evolving BBB had the weakest adjusted association [HR: 1.39 (95 % CI: 0.80-2.40)].
conclusionsThe prevalence and prognostic significance of SMI are impacted by the ECG criteria defining MI. A uniform approach(s) for detection of SMI in population studies which builds on the available standard definitions that fit different research scenarios is needed.
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.