Abstract P134: Cardiac Screening in Adolescent and Young Athletes: A 3 year Cross Sectional Study Assessing the Diagnostic Accuracy of the History Questionnaire, Physical Examination, and Electrocardiogram
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background & Aim: The accuracy of each cardiac screening tool for young athletes needs further investigation. The aim of this study is to evaluate the Preparticipation Physical Evaluation Monograph 4 th Edition (PPE-4), which is the current recommendation for cardiovascular screening in young athletes, and the 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG). Methods: During October 2010 to June 2013 student athletes from high schools around the greater Seattle area received a one-time cardiac screen including history and physical examination as recommended in the PPE-4, and a resting 12-lead ECG. Those with abnormal findings received a focused echocardiogram. Student athletes were defined as participating in at least one high school level sport or higher per year. A true positive was defined as the identification of a cardiac disorder associated with sudden cardiac death. Sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), false positive rate (FP), and positive and negative likelihood ratios (+LR, -LR), were calculated for each screening tool. Results: Screening events were held at 23 high schools; 4,743 student athletes ranged in age from 13-19 (mean 15.8), 54% male, 65% Caucasian, 13% mixed race, 10% Asian/Pacific Islander, 6% African-American. A total of 1065 (23%) students had at least one positive history response after physician review, 408 (9%) had an abnormal finding on physical exam, and 185 (4%) had an abnormal ECG. Echocardiography was performed on 1417 students who presented a positive finding on history, physical, or ECG or were a male basketball player. There were 21 cardiac disorders identified that could potentially lead to SCD (0.4%). Wolff-Parkinson-White (9) was most common, followed by 4 cases of coronary artery abnormalities, 3 cases of Long QT Syndrome, 3 dilated aortic roots or aneurysm, and 1 case each of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and Short QT Syndrome. ECG identified 14 cases of those 21, Echo identified 9 cases of those 21. The history questionnaire had a Sn of 52%, Sp 78%, +LR 2.4, and FP 22%. Physical Exam had a Sn 19%, Sp 91%, +LR 2.2, and FP 9%. ECG had a Sn 67%, Sp 96%, +LR 18.4, and FP 4%. Conclusion: ECG had the highest Sn, Sp, and +LR of the screening tools evaluated. History and physical exam had lower Sn and +LRs and higher false positive rates. A limitation to this study is that there is no gold standard for this screening protocol. ECG may miss structural abnormalities and Echo may miss conduction disorders. A combination of the two tests was considered the gold standard, meaning sensitivity of all tests may be overestimated. More research is needed to improve the performance of cardiovascular screening methods especially through the history questionnaire and physical exam. Out of the three tools evaluated the best tool to detect underlying cardiovascular conditions associated with SCD is ECG.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».