ArticleHeart rhythm O22026
pECGreview: Using "Not-to-Miss" ECG diagnoses to assess competency of trainees and faculty in ECG interpretation via a weekly online ECG education program.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Trainees and practitioners are suboptimal in their pediatric electrocardiogram (pECG) interpretation skills. We have previously validated a pECG educational tool, Pediatric ECG Review, as a weekly, Web-based program inviting free-text pECG interpretations and providing direct feedback. Objective: We expanded the pECG education tool by introducing a novel approach to pECG interpretation: "Not-to-Miss" (NTM). We evaluated the validity of this approach as an assessment of pECG reading accuracy and competency for a cohort of pediatric cardiology fellows and faculty. Methods: A multiple-choice selection of 18 critical NTM diagnoses was added to our existing Pediatric ECG Review program. We retrospectively reviewed 2846 responses, before (group 1) and after (group 2) the addition of the NTM approach ("NTM group"). Group 1 contained previously assigned accuracy scores based on free-text responses ("Accuracy group") and retrospectively assigned NTM diagnoses for comparison ("assignedNTM group"). Each response was classified as correct, underdiagnosis, or overdiagnosis. Results: Frequency of underdiagnosing was similar in NTM and assignedNTM responses (17% and 18%). Overdiagnosing was more common in the NTM group than assignedNTM and accuracy groups (31% vs 21% and 10%). Frequency of correct scores was 62% for assignedNTM and 50% for NTM vs 84% for accuracy scores. Atrial fibrillation, high-grade atrioventricular block, and supraventricular tachycardia were most frequently underdiagnosed in the NTM groups but less frequently missed in the accuracy group. Conclusion: The NTM approach is a feasible way to emphasize critical diagnoses and automate the assessment of competency in pECG interpretation. Cognitive bias leads to overdiagnosing when prompted with a multiple-choice format.
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.