ArticlePhysiological reports2018
Decision support for assessment of left ventricular diastolic function.
Article in Physiological reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diastolic dysfunction is equally common in pre-diabetes and diabetes and associated with concomitant cardiometabolic risk factors.Open heart · 2026Article
- Distribution of diffuse myocardial fibrosis is uneven and associated with left ventricular function in severe aortic stenosis.Open heart · 2026Article
- Heterogeneous myocardial contraction detected by speckle tracking echocardiography in systemic lupus erythematosus is associated with complement protein C4: a cross-sectional study from a Swedish tertiary referral centre.Rheumatology international · 2025Article
- Evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function in patients operated for aortic stenosis.PloS one · 2022Observational
- Left Ventricular Diastolic Dysfunction in Type 2 Diabetes-Progress and Perspectives.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Decision support for assessment of left ventricular diastolic function.Physiological reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Echocardiographic assessment of the left ventricular diastolic function (LVDF), an integrated part of evaluation of left ventricular function is still a delicate task and is performed with substantial inter-rater variability. Therefore, we aimed to create and evaluate a guidelines-based automated decision support. An algorithm was created for a hierarchical analysis of LVDF based on variables as recommended by the latest guidelines. Age-adjusted normal ranges were pooled from previously published studies into an integrated reference table. For proof-of-concept, 20 echocardiographic examinations were analyzed offline by four experienced physicians with more than 10 years of echocardiographic experience. The first assessments were to be performed as they would be in the clinical practice. Six months later, the assessments were repeated based on the 2017 ASE/EACVI guidelines. The overall inter-rater agreement for the first clinical assessments was moderate, while the guidelines-based assessments had only fair inter-rater agreement. Both kinds of manual assessment had poor agreement with the standardized automated assessment algorithm of LVDF. In conclusion, the presented automated decision support for evaluation of diastolic LV function by Doppler echocardiography is mainly based on current guidelines involving multiple parameters in combination. Incorporating age dependency aspects in our program (available for use at https://liu.se/en/research/left-ventricular-diastolic-function-decision-support) enhances the accuracy of the evaluation and reduces variability in evaluation of LVDF. The large inter-rater variation in classification in this study also underscores the usefulness of tools to support a standardized evaluation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.