Key result
In a large survey of occupational health screenings, 14.7% of resting ECGs were assessed as abnormal and 2.5% required further evaluation, with rates varying based on institutional assessment practices.
Cross-Sectional (n=2,770,239)
Yes
Interpreting resting ECGs in occupational health checkups without referring to clinical context leads to higher rates of requiring further examination, highlighting the need for comprehensive interpretation guidelines.
Variability in ECG interpretation may increase unnecessary referrals; leaves open need for standardized, context-aware guidelines in occupational screenings.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
久代 和加子 (2010) conducted a cross-sectional in Occupational health screening (n=2,770,239). Resting electrocardiogram (ECG) screening was evaluated on Rate of ECGs requiring further evaluation. In a large survey of occupational health screenings, 14.7% of resting ECGs were assessed as abnormal and 2.5% required further evaluation, with rates varying based on institutional assessment practices.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: