Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cardiovascular Screening in College Athletes With and Without Electrocardiography: A Cross-sectional Study

Baggish, Aaron L., Hutter, Adolph M., Wang, Francis, Yared, Kibar, Weiner, Rory B., Kupperman, Eli, Picard, Michael H., Wood, Malissa J.·2010·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although cardiovascular screening is recommended for athletes before participating in sports, the role of 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG) remains uncertain. To date, no prospective data that compare screening with and without ECG have been available. OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of preparticipation screening limited to medical history and physical examination with a strategy that integrates these with ECG. DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparison of screening strategies. SETTING: University Health Services, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. PARTICIPANTS: 510 collegiate athletes who received cardiovascular screening before athletic participation. MEASUREMENTS: Each participant had routine history and examination-limited screening and ECG. They received transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) to detect or exclude cardiac findings with relevance to sports participation. The performance of screening with history and examination only was compared with that of screening that integrated history, examination, and ECG. RESULTS: Cardiac abnormalities with relevance to sports participation risk were observed on TTE in 11 of 510 participants (prevalence, 2.2%). Screening with history and examination alone detected abnormalities in 5 of these 11 athletes (sensitivity, 45.5% [95% CI, 16.8% to 76.2%]; specificity, 94.4% [CI, 92.0% to 96.2%]). Electrocardiography detected 5 additional participants with cardiac abnormalities (for a total of 10 of 11 participants), thereby improving the overall sensitivity of screening to 90.9% (CI, 58.7% to 99.8%). However, including ECG reduced the specificity of screening to 82.7% (CI, 79.1% to 86.0%) and was associated with a false-positive rate of 16.9% (vs. 5.5% for screening with history and examination only). LIMITATION: Definitive conclusions regarding the effect of ECG inclusion on sudden death rates cannot be made. CONCLUSION: Adding ECG to medical history and physical examination improves the overall sensitivity of preparticipation cardiovascular screening in athletes. However, this strategy is associated with an increased rate of false-positive results when current ECG interpretation criteria are used. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

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 · 10.7326/0003-4819-152-5-201003020-00004

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 309

Metadata

Authors
Baggish, A. L., Hutter, A. M., Wang, F., Yared, K., Weiner, R. B., Kupperman, E., Picard, M. H., & Wood, M. J.
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
2010-03-02
Volume
152
Issue
5
Pages
269-275
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W1963663255
Cited by
309
References
4
FWCI
24.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Cardiovascular Screening in College Athletes With and Without Electrocardiography: A Cross-sectional Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7326/0003-4819-152-5-201003020-00004
The paper
Baggish, A. L., Hutter, A. M., Wang, F., Yared, K., Weiner, R. B., Kupperman, E., Picard, M. H., & Wood, M. J. (2010). Cardiovascular Screening in College Athletes With and Without Electrocardiography: A Cross-sectional Study. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-152-5-201003020-00004

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.