Cited by 38Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersECG Monitoring and AnalysisCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias

Optimal duration of event recording for diagnosis of arrhythmias in patients with palpitations and light-headedness in the general practice

Hoefman, E., van Weert, H. C., Boer, K. R., Reitsma, J., Koster, R. W., Bindels, P. J.·2006·Family Practice

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient-activated continuous-loop event recorders (CER) are useful as a diagnostic tool in new episodes of palpitations and/or dizziness. So far, no analysis of optimal duration for monitoring in unselected patients has been published. METHODS: During a period of 30 days, we prospectively evaluated the time until diagnosis using CER in patients with symptoms of palpitations and/or dizziness in general practice. RESULTS: In total, 127 patients received an event recorder for a maximum duration of 30 days. Events were recorded by 104 patients (82%), of whom 83 (78%) showed an arrhythmia. After 2 weeks, 75% of all diagnoses and 83.3% of all clinically relevant diagnoses could be established. CONCLUSION: The yield of event recording in general practice diminishes with recording time. A minimum recording time of 2 weeks seems necessary.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/fampra/cml065

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hoefman, E., van Weert, H. C., Boer, K. R., Reitsma, J., Koster, R. W., & Bindels, P. J.
Affiliations
Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
Venue
Family Practice
Published
2006-10-18
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
11-13
ISSN
  • 0263-2136 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2229
OpenAlex
W2133052949
Cited by
38
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Family Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Keywords
arrhythmia diagnosis, palpitations, dizziness, lightheadedness, diagnostic yield, general practice
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Atrial Fibrillation, Dizziness, Family Practice, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Syncope, Tachycardia, Supraventricular, Telemetry, Time Factors, Electrocardiography, Ambulatory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review