Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 924

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prediction of All-Cause Mortality From Global Longitudinal Speckle Strain: Comparison With Ejection Fraction and Wall Motion Scoring

Open access
Stanton, Tony, Leano, Rodel, Marwick, Thomas H.·2009·Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging

Abstract

Background— Although global left ventricular systolic function is an important determinant of mortality, standard measures such as ejection fraction (EF) and wall motion score index (WMSI) have important technical limitations. The aim of this study was to compare global longitudinal speckle strain (GLS), an automated technique for measurement of long-axis function, with EF and WMSI for the prediction of mortality. Methods and Results— Of 546 consecutive individuals undergoing echocardiography for assessment of resting left ventricular function, 91 died over a period of 5.2�1.5 years. In addition to Simpson biplane EF, WMSI was determined by 2 experienced readers and GLS was calculated from 3 standard apical views using 2D speckle tracking. The incremental value of EF, WMSI, and GLS to significant clinical variables was assessed in nested Cox models. Clinical factors associated with outcome (model χ 2 =20.2) were age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.46; P <0.01), diabetes (HR, 1.88; P =0.01), and hypertension (HR, 1.59; P <0.05). Although addition of EF (HR, 1.23; P =0.03) or WMSI (HR, 1.28; P <0.01) added to the predictive power of clinical variables, the addition of GLS (HR, 1.45; P <0.001) caused the greatest increment in model power (χ 2 =34.9, P <0.001). GLS also provided incremental value in subgroups with EF >35% and those with and without wall motion abnormalities. A GLS ≥−12% was found to be equivalent to an EF ≤35% for the prediction of prognosis. Intraobserver and interobserver variations for EF and GLS were similar. Conclusions— GLS is a superior predictor of outcome to either EF or WMSI and may become the optimal method for assessment of global left ventricular systolic function.

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/circimaging.109.862334

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 924

Metadata

Authors
Stanton, T., Leano, R., & Marwick, T. H.
Venue
Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging
Published
2009-09
Volume
2
Issue
5
Pages
356-364
ISSN
  • 1941-9651 (ISSN-L)
  • 1942-0080
OpenAlex
W2098766590
Cited by
924
References
3
FWCI
18.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Prediction of All-Cause Mortality From Global Longitudinal Speckle Strain: Comparison With Ejection Fraction and Wall Motion Scoring. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circimaging.109.862334
The paper
Stanton, T., Leano, R., & Marwick, T. H. (2009). Prediction of All-Cause Mortality From Global Longitudinal Speckle Strain: Comparison With Ejection Fraction and Wall Motion Scoring. Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1161/circimaging.109.862334

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.