ArticleBMC emergency medicine2026
Cardiac findings and observation duration in patients with syncope in the emergency department: a cohort study.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly identification of cardiac syncope is critical because it is associated with adverse outcomes in the emergency department. However, the optimal observation duration remains unclear. In this study, we evaluated factors associated with ED observation time in patients with syncope, determined the timing of cardiac findings, and identified the clinical features that distinguish cardiac from neurally mediated or orthostatic syncope.
methodsA cohort study was conducted in the emergency department of an urban hospital, including 400 adult patients with syncope. Patients with transient loss of consciousness due to syncopal causes were excluded. The primary outcome was the presence and timing of cardiac findings (rhythm, structural cardiogenic, or both) during the observation period in the emergency department. Data were extracted from the electronic health records. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with cardiac syncope and time spent in the emergency department. Cumulative and incidence rate analyses of the time until a cardiac finding within 24 h were estimated using a time-to-event function.
resultsCardiac syncope was associated with older age (OR: 1.04 per year; 95% CI: 1.02–1.07), prior pacemaker or ICD implantation (OR: 4.17; 95% CI: 1.50–11.6), absence of autonomic symptoms (OR: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.08–0.31), and abnormal electrocardiogram findings (OR: 6.84; 95% CI: 3.00–15.6), and higher rates of hospital admission (OR: 31.7; 95% CI: 14.1–71.3) and pacemaker implantation (OR: 63.0; 95% CI: 18.5–245). Cardiac findings were confirmed in 70.5% of patients initially classified as having cardiac syncope (OR: 33.0; 95% CI: 15.3–71.2). Most cardiac findings (70.9%) occurred within the first 12 h (incidence density: 1.04 vs. 0.54 per 100 patient-hours). The cumulative incidence increased from 12.5% at 12 h to 23.3% at 24 h, then slowed.
conclusionMost cardiac findings were identified within the first 12 h of observation. These results support a selective strategy in which prolonged monitoring (≥ 12 h) may be reserved for patients with predefined clinical conditions, electrocardiographic markers, or concerns regarding underlying heart disease at initial assessment. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.