ArticleVeterinary research communications2026
Electrocardiographic recording in horses at rest: a concordance analysis of two methods.
Article in Veterinary research communications, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac arrhythmias are frequently detected during routine auscultation in athletic horses. Assessment of their clinical significance requires electrocardiography (ECG) to analyze waveforms and intervals. In recent years, portable ECG devices have been introduced to simplify electrocardiographic examination, offering advantages such as ease of use and the ability to review results via a smartphone. This study evaluated the utility and accuracy of a portable ECG device compared with a standard electrocardiograph. Simultaneous ECG recordings were obtained from 28 healthy adult horses at rest using a portable device (eKuore) and a standard electrocardiograph (Cardioline Vet600). Agreement between the two methods was assessed using Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman analysis. All recordings were independently interpreted by two observers. A significant bias was observed between methods for heart rate, PR interval, and QRS duration, with higher values obtained using the portable device. Two arrhythmias were identified: second-degree atrioventricular block and atrial fibrillation. Agreement for arrhythmia detection was perfect (κ = 1.00), while agreement for heart rhythm classification (bradycardia, normal rhythm, or tachycardia) was good (κ = 0.73). In conclusion, the portable device demonstrated good diagnostic performance for arrhythmia detection during routine clinical examinations. However, further studies are required to establish reference intervals specific to this device.
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.