Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31489388›Full record

ReviewForensic sciences research2019

Evaluation of cardiac hypertrophy in the setting of sudden cardiac death.

Kristopher S Cunningham, Danna A Spears, Melanie Care

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Forensic sciences research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Heart weight must not be measured before dissection during autopsies.International journal of legal medicine · 2023
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kristopher S CunninghamDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Ontario Forensic Pathology Service, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Danna A SpearsUniversity Health Network, Division of Cardiology - Electrophysiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2513-1627
Melanie CareFred A. Litwin Family Centre in Genetic Medicine and Inherited Arrhythmia Clinic, University Health Network & Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Mount Sinai Hospital · CAUniversity Health Network · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ventricular hypertrophy is a common pathological finding at autopsy that can act as a substrate for arrhythmogenesis. Pathologists grapple with the significance of ventricular hypertrophy when assessing the sudden and unexpected deaths of young people and what it could mean for surviving family members. The pathological spectrum of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is reviewed herein. This article is oriented to the practicing autopsy pathologist to help make sense of various patterns of increased heart muscle, particularly those that are not clearly cardiomyopathic, yet present in the setting of sudden cardiac death. The article also reviews factors influencing arrhythmogenesis as well as genetic mutations most commonly associated with ventricular hypertrophy, especially those associated with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM).

Indexed as

arrhythmiaforensic pathologyForensic sciencesgeneticssudden cardiac deathventricular hypertrophy

Identifiers

PMID31489388
PMCPMC6713129
OpenAlexW2969378084

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.