title: A meta-analysis of published studies concerning the validity of thoracic impedance cardiography.
abstract: Our aim was to provide a meta-analysis of the literature concerning the validation of thoracic impedance cardiography (TIC) and to explain variations in reported results from differences in the studies. One hundred fifty-four studies (164 Fisher's Z-transformed correlation coefficients) comparing measurements of cardiac output or related parameters from TIC and a reference method were analyzed. Papers were classified according to differences in TIC methodology, reference method, and subject characteristics. Pooling using the random-effects method yielded an overall correlation of r = 0.82 (95% confidence interval: 0.80-0.84). ANOVA revealed a significant influence of the reference method and the subject characteristics on the correlation coefficient. In cardiac patients, the correlation was significantly decreased. No influence of the applied TIC methodology was found.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  TIC might be useful for trend analysis of different groups of patients. However, since the reference method was of significant influence, differences between TIC and the reference method are incorrectly attributed to TIC alone.
authors.affiliation: Dr. B. Verbeeten Institute, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Raaijmakers
authors.forename: T J
authors.initials: TJ
authors.lastname: Faes
authors.forename: R J
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: Scholten
authors.forename: H G
authors.initials: HG
authors.lastname: Goovaerts
authors.forename: R M
authors.initials: RM
authors.lastname: Heethaar
mesh_terms: D000367:Age Factors; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D002302:Cardiac Output; D002307:Cardiography, Impedance / Q000379:methods*; D017097:Electric Impedance; D005260:Female; D006321:Heart / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011247:Pregnancy; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D013318:Stroke Volume