Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25920482›Full record

ReviewJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2015

Review of cardiovascular imaging in The Journal of Nuclear Cardiology in 2014: Part 2 of 2: Myocardial perfusion imaging.

Fadi G Hage, Wael A AlJaroudi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2022: positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023
    Review
  2. Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2022: single photon emission computed tomography.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023
    Review
  3. Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2020: positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021
    Review
  4. Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2019: Single-photon emission computed tomography.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020
    Review
  5. Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2019: Positron emission tomography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology in 2017. Part 2 of 2: Myocardial perfusion imaging.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2018
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review of cardiovascular imaging in the journal of nuclear cardiology in 2016: Part 2 of 2-myocardial perfusion imaging.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2017
    Review
  10. Comparative analysis of full-time, half-time, and quarter-time myocardial ECG-gated SPECT quantification in normal-weight and overweight patients.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2017
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review of Cardiovascular Imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology in 2015-Part 2 of 2: Myocardial perfusion imaging.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2016
    Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Fadi G HageDivision of Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA, fadihage@uab.edu.
Wael A AlJaroudi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this new feature of The Journal of Nuclear Cardiology we will summarize key articles that were published in the Journal in the previous year. In the first article of this 2-part series we concentrated on publications dealing with cardiac positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and neuronal imaging. This review will focus on myocardial perfusion imaging summarizing advances in the field including in diagnosis, prognosis, appropriateness, and safety of testing.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseHumansImage EnhancementMyocardial IschemiaMyocardial Perfusion ImagingReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, Emission-ComputedVentricular Dysfunction, Left

Identifiers

PMID25920482

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.