Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 289

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Critical Appraisal of the Electrocardiographic Criteria for the Diagnosis of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy

Open access
ROMHILT, DONALD W., BOVE, KEVIN E., NORRIS, ROBERT J., CONYERS, EMMETT, CONRADI, SANDRA, ROWLANDS, DAVID T., SCOTT, RALPH C.·1969·Circulation

Abstract

Thirty-three different electrocardiographic criteria for left ventricular hypertrophy have been evaluated in 360 autopsied hearts utilizing a chamber dissection technic. One hundred and sixty hearts had left ventricular hypertrophy, and 200 hearts did not (146 of these were normal, and 54 had right ventricular hypertrophy). The following five electrocardiographic criteria had a sensitivity of 56% but 10.5% to 14.5% false positives: S v1 or S v2 +R v5 ≥35 mm, S v1 +R v5 or R v6 >30 mm, S v1 , or S v2 + R v5 or R v6 >35 mm, S v2 +R v4 or R v5 >35 mm, R+S>40 mm. A point-score system employing a combination of criteria had a sensitivity of 54%, but lowered the false positives to 3%. The best limb-lead criterion was R aV L >7.5 which had a sensitivity of 22.5% with only 3.5% false positives. The following criteria had no false positives, but the highest sensitivity was 19%: S v1 ≥24 mm, R aV L >11 mm, R I +S III >25 mm, R I >13 mm, R aV L >12 mm, R I >15 mm, R aV L >13 mm, and S aV R >14 mm. Overall the precordial lead criteria were considerably more sensitive but less specific than the limb lead criteria. Since only six of the 200 hearts without left ventricular hypertrophy were in persons less than 30 years of age, this is not the major explanation for the high incidence of false positives in the more sensitive voltage criteria. The problems of using voltage criteria alone and the need for new criteria and approaches to the electrocardiographic diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy are discussed.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.cir.40.2.185

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.

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

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

Cited by

See all 289

Metadata

Authors
ROMHILT, D. W., BOVE, K. E., NORRIS, R. J., CONYERS, E., CONRADI, S., ROWLANDS, D. T., & SCOTT, R. C.
Venue
Circulation
Published
1969-08
Volume
40
Issue
2
Pages
185-196
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2037451565
Cited by
289
References
0
FWCI
4.76
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: A Critical Appraisal of the Electrocardiographic Criteria for the Diagnosis of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.40.2.185
The paper
ROMHILT, D. W., BOVE, K. E., NORRIS, R. J., CONYERS, E., CONRADI, S., ROWLANDS, D. T., & SCOTT, R. C. (1969). A Critical Appraisal of the Electrocardiographic Criteria for the Diagnosis of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.40.2.185

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.