Pulsed Field Ablation with the Pentaspline Catheter vs Radiofrequency Ablation for Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation.

Cheng W, Chen X, Wang S, Qin M, Zhao Z

DOI: 10.1016/j.cjco.2026.05.009
Published: 2026 Sep
Container: CJC open
Publisher: Not recorded
Open access: yes

Credibility signals

limited evidence Score 45/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

cautionDOI registered: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
cautionDOI resolves: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
not scoredDirectory of Open Access Journals: No matching DOAJ record was present in this response. No allow-list match; this is not evidence of low credibility. Source: DOAJ; license: CC0
not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
supportingOpen access status: Normalized open-access status: open. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
cautionMetadata completeness: 5 of 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present; missing fields increase uncertainty. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.1016/j.cjco.2026.05.009,
  title = {Pulsed Field Ablation with the Pentaspline Catheter vs Radiofrequency Ablation for Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation.},
  author = {Cheng W and Chen X and Wang S and Qin M and Zhao Z},
  year = {2026},
  journal = {CJC open},
  doi = {10.1016/j.cjco.2026.05.009},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjco.2026.05.009}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Pulsed Field Ablation with the Pentaspline Catheter vs Radiofrequency Ablation for Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation.
AU  - Cheng W
AU  - Chen X
AU  - Wang S
AU  - Qin M
AU  - Zhao Z
PY  - 2026
JO  - CJC open
DO  - 10.1016/j.cjco.2026.05.009
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjco.2026.05.009
ER  -

APA

W, C., X, C., S, W., M, Q., & Z, Z. (2026). Pulsed Field Ablation with the Pentaspline Catheter vs Radiofrequency Ablation for Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation.. CJC open. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjco.2026.05.009

Source records

pubmed · retrieved 2026-09-25T20:43:42.737Z