The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of intravenous magnesium in suspected acute myocardial infarction: overview of randomised trials.
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of intravenous magnesium on mortality in suspected acute myocardial infarction. DESIGN: Systematic overview of all available randomised trials in which patients were allocated to receive either intravenous magnesium or otherwise similar treatment without magnesium. SETTING: Coronary care units of several hospitals. PATIENTS: 1301 patients in seven randomised trials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Short term mortality. RESULTS: Considering the seven trials collectively there were 25 (3.8%) deaths among 657 patients allocated to receive magnesium and 53 (8.2%) deaths among 644 patients allocated control, generally during hospital follow up. This represents a 55% reduction in the odds of death (p less than 0.001) with 95% confidence intervals ranging from about one third to about two thirds. 70 of 648 patients allocated magnesium compared with 109 of 641 controls had serious ventricular arrhythmias, suggesting that magnesium reduces the incidence, though the definition varied among trials. Other adverse effects were rare in the limited number of patients for whom this data were available. CONCLUSION: Despite the limited number of patients randomised this overview suggests that intravenous magnesium therapy may reduce mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Further large scale trials to confirm (or refute) these findings are desirable.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: An overview of the randomized trials
Yusuf, S., Peto, R., Lewis, J., Collins, R., & Sleight, P. (1985) · Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases · doi:10.1016/s0033-0620(85)80003-7 · Cited by 3,205
Self-citation
Cited by
Sterne, J. A. C., Sutton, A. J., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Terrin, N., Jones, D. R., Lau, J., Carpenter, J., Rucker, G., Harbord, R. M., Schmid, C. H., et al. (2011) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.d4002 · Cited by 7,709
Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis
Sterne, J. A. C., & Egger, M. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00377-8 · Cited by 3,779
GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision
Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Alonso-Coello, P., Rind, D., Devereaux, P. J., Montori, V. M., Freyschuss, B., Vist, G., et al. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.012 · Cited by 2,693
Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: An update
DerSimonian, R., & Kacker, R. (2007) · Contemporary Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2006.04.004 · Cited by 2,374
Ellis, P. D. (2010) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511761676 · Cited by 2,461
Metadata
- Authors
- Teo, K. K., Yusuf, S., Collins, R., Held, P. H., & Peto, R.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1991-12-14
- Volume
- 303
- Issue
- 6816
- Pages
- 1499-1503
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W2093437752
- Cited by
- 331
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 17.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effects of intravenous magnesium in suspected acute myocardial infarction: overview of randomised trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.303.6816.1499
- The paper
- Teo, K. K., Yusuf, S., Collins, R., Held, P. H., & Peto, R. (1991). Effects of intravenous magnesium in suspected acute myocardial infarction: overview of randomised trials. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.303.6816.1499
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.