Comparative accuracy of manual versus computerized electrocardiographic measurement of J-, ST- and T-wave deviations in patients with acute coronary syndrome.
暂无分享,去创建一个
Heini Huhtala | K. Nikus | P. Porela | L. Voipio‐Pulkki | H. Huhtala | M. Eskola | Pekka Porela | Kjell C Nikus | Markku J Eskola | Liisa-Maria Voipio-Pulkki | Juha Lund | Tuomo Ilva | Tiina Parviainen | T. Ilva | J. Lund | T. Parviainen
[1] D. Altman,et al. STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.
[2] B. Drew,et al. Computer versus manual measurement of ST-segment deviation. , 1997, Journal of electrocardiology.
[3] M. Simoons,et al. Prehospital versus hospital fibrinolytic therapy using automated versus cardiologist electrocardiographic diagnosis of myocardial infarction: abortion of myocardial infarction and unjustified fibrinolytic therapy. , 2004, American heart journal.
[4] Douglas G. Altman,et al. Practical statistics for medical research , 1990 .
[5] Frans Van de Werf,et al. Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. The Task Force on the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology. , 2003 .
[6] G. Wagner,et al. Differences between local investigator and core laboratory interpretation of the admission electrocardiogram in patients with unstable angina pectoris or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (a Thrombin Inhibition in Myocardial Ischemia [TRIM] substudy). , 1998, The American journal of cardiology.
[7] Mark E Josephson,et al. Use of the electrocardiogram in acute myocardial infarction. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.
[8] J E Pope,et al. Development and validation of an automated method of the Selvester QRS scoring system for myocardial infarct size. , 1988, The American journal of cardiology.
[9] O Pahlm,et al. Performance of the automated complete Selvester QRS scoring system in normal subjects and patients with single and multiple myocardial infarctions. , 1992, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
[10] D. Massel,et al. Strict reliance on a computer algorithm or measurable ST segment criteria may lead to errors in thrombolytic therapy eligibility. , 2000, American heart journal.
[11] R. Prineas,et al. Changing electrocardiographic recording technology and diagnostic accuracy of myocardial infarction criteria. Improved standards for evaluation of ECG measurement precision. , 1978, Journal of electrocardiology.
[12] H. Helenius,et al. Automated electrocardiographic scores to estimate myocardial injury size during the course of acute myocardial infarction. , 1999, The American journal of cardiology.
[13] I. Menown,et al. Optimizing the initial 12-lead electrocardiographic diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction. , 2000, European heart journal.
[14] P. Elko,et al. A statistical analysis of the ECG measurements used in computerized interpretation of acute anterior myocardial infarction with applications to interpretive criteria development. , 1992, Journal of electrocardiology.
[15] Carl J Pepine,et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction--summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
[16] B Rotman,et al. Comparison of different methods of ST measurement for evaluation of myocardial ischaemia in Holter monitoring. , 1988, European heart journal.
[17] S. Goodacre,et al. Do computer generated ECG reports improve interpretation by accident and emergency senior house officers? , 2001, Postgraduate medical journal.