These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

414 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10553343)

  • 21. Experiences with different computerprograms for the ECG-analysis.
    Meyer J; Heinrich KW; Merx W; Effert S
    G Ital Cardiol; 1975; 5(2):279-87. PubMed ID: 1102376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Electrocardiogram differentiation of benign early repolarization versus acute myocardial infarction by emergency physicians and cardiologists.
    Turnipseed SD; Bair AE; Kirk JD; Diercks DB; Tabar P; Amsterdam EA
    Acad Emerg Med; 2006 Sep; 13(9):961-6. PubMed ID: 16885399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. ECG of the month. ECG the day after aortic valve replacement. Isorhythmic dissociation of an accelerated junctional rhythm from sinus rhythm, left anterior fascicular block, left ventricular hypertrophy with repolarization change.
    Glancy DL; LeLorier PA; Nijjar VS
    J La State Med Soc; 2011; 163(2):69-70. PubMed ID: 21667800
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Errors in the computerized electrocardiogram interpretation of cardiac rhythm.
    Shah AP; Rubin SA
    J Electrocardiol; 2007; 40(5):385-90. PubMed ID: 17531257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Development and performance of Mayo-IBM electrocardiographic computer analysis programs (V70).
    Hu KC; Francis DB; Gau GT; Smith RE
    Mayo Clin Proc; 1973 Apr; 48(4):260-8. PubMed ID: 4266427
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Accuracy of electrocardiogram interpretation by cardiologists in the setting of incorrect computer analysis.
    Anh D; Krishnan S; Bogun F
    J Electrocardiol; 2006 Jul; 39(3):343-5. PubMed ID: 16777525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Computerized electrocardiogram interpretations: are they useful for the family physician?
    Grauer K; Kravitz L; Curry RW; Ariet M
    J Fam Pract; 1987 Jan; 24(1):39-43. PubMed ID: 3540179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Diagnostic interpretation of electrocardiograms in population-based research: computer program research physicians, or cardiologists?
    de Bruyne MC; Kors JA; Hoes AW; Kruijssen DA; Deckers JW; Grosfeld M; van Herpen G; Grobbee DE; van Bemmel JH
    J Clin Epidemiol; 1997 Aug; 50(8):947-52. PubMed ID: 9291880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A method for evaluating computer programs for electrocardiographic interpretation. I. Application to the experimental IBM program of 1971.
    Bailey JJ; Itscoitz SB; Hirshfeld JW; Grauer LE; Horton MR
    Circulation; 1974 Jul; 50(1):73-9. PubMed ID: 4276018
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A method for evaluating computer programs for electrocardiographic interpretation. II. Application to version D of the PHS program and the Mayo Clinic program of 1968.
    Bailey JJ; Itscoitz SB; Grauer LE; Hirshfeld JW; Horton MR
    Circulation; 1974 Jul; 50(1):80-7. PubMed ID: 4276019
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The Computerized ECG: Friend and Foe.
    Smulyan H
    Am J Med; 2019 Feb; 132(2):153-160. PubMed ID: 30205084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The impact of an ECG computer analysis program on the cardiologist's interpretation. A cooperative study.
    Milliken JA; Pipberger H; Pipberger HV; Araoye MA; Ari R; Burggraf GW; Fletcher RD; Katz RJ; Lopez EA; McCans JL; Silver AM
    J Electrocardiol; 1983 Apr; 16(2):141-9. PubMed ID: 6222129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. A comparison of electrocardiograms interpreted by physician and computer.
    Acker JJ; Acker JE; Overholt BM
    J Tenn Med Assoc; 1972 May; 65(5):439-41. PubMed ID: 4554121
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Defining unrecognized myocardial infarction: a call for standardized electrocardiographic diagnostic criteria.
    Ammar KA; Kors JA; Yawn BP; Rodeheffer RJ
    Am Heart J; 2004 Aug; 148(2):277-84. PubMed ID: 15308997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Evaluation of a computer programme for interpretation of 12-lead electrocardiograms.
    Landelius J; Nordgren L
    Ups J Med Sci; 1979; 84(1):37-46. PubMed ID: 155918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Will the electrocardiograph replace the electrocardiographer?
    Rautaharju PM
    J Electrocardiol; 1993; 26 Suppl():158-63. PubMed ID: 8189120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. ECG signal denoising and baseline wander correction based on the empirical mode decomposition.
    Blanco-Velasco M; Weng B; Barner KE
    Comput Biol Med; 2008 Jan; 38(1):1-13. PubMed ID: 17669389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Employment of intra-individual variability to improve computerized ECG interpretation.
    Schijvenaars BJ; Kors JA; van Herpen G; van Bemmel JH
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2001; 84(Pt 1):513-7. PubMed ID: 11604793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [Value of the automated analysis of the electrocardiogram by the Telemed program (V version)].
    Bernard P; Chaitman BR; Scholl JM; Chabot M
    Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss; 1981 Oct; 74(10):1155-62. PubMed ID: 6796019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The emergency department versus the computer: which is the better electrocardiographer?
    Snyder CS; Fenrich AL; Friedman RA; Macias C; O'Reilly K; Kertesz NJ
    Pediatr Cardiol; 2003; 24(4):364-8. PubMed ID: 12457259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 21.