Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16790531›Full record

ArticleHeart (British Cardiac Society)2007

How effective are rapid access chest pain clinics? Prognosis of incident angina and non-cardiac chest pain in 8762 consecutive patients.

N Sekhri, G S Feder, C Junghans, H Hemingway, A D Timmis

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Heart (British Cardiac Society), 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07163767 (Acute Myocardial Infarction Prediction Using Artificial Intelligence Applied to Electrocardiogram Images), which is not on this map. Cited by 60 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07163767 active not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Acute Myocardial Infarction Prediction Using Artificial Intelligence Applied to Electrocardiogram Images

TypeobservationalSponsorGuangdong Provincial People's HospitalRan2025 to 2028Enrolled150,000ConditionsAcute Myocardial Infarction (AMI), Electrocardiography, Artifical IntelligenceArmsDeep learning approach of ECG for AMI detection
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

60 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 150 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Utilization of diagnostic resources and costs in patients with suspected cardiac chest pain.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

N SekhriNewham University Hospital, London, UK.
G S Feder
C Junghans
H Hemingway
A D Timmis
University College London · GBBarts Health NHS Trust · GBNewham University Hospital · GBQueen Mary University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine whether rapid access chest pain clinics are clinically effective by comparison of coronary event rates in patients diagnosed with angina with rates in patients diagnosed with non-cardiac chest pain and the general population.

designMulticentre cohort study of consecutive patients with chest pain attending the rapid access chest pain clinics (RACPCs) of six hospitals in England.

participants8762 patients diagnosed with either non-cardiac chest pain (n = 6396) or incident angina without prior myocardial infarction (n = 2366) at first cardiological assessment, followed up for a median of 2.57 (interquartile range 1.96-4.15) years.

main outcome measuresPrimary end point--death due to coronary heart disease (International Classification of Diseases (ICD)10 I20-I25) or acute coronary syndrome (non-fatal myocardial infarction (ICD10 I21-I23), hospital admission with unstable angina (I24.0, I24.8, I24.9)). Secondary end points--all-cause mortality (ICD I20), cardiovascular death (ICD10 I00-I99), or non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke (I60-I69).

resultsThe cumulative probability of the primary end point in patients diagnosed with angina was 16.52% (95% confidence interval (CI) 14.88% to 18.32%) after 3 years compared with 2.73% (95% CI 2.29% to 3.25%) in patients with non-cardiac chest pain. Coronary standardised mortality ratios for men and women with angina aged <65 years were 3.52 (95% CI 1.98 to 5.07) and 4.39 (95% CI 1.14 to 7.64). Of the 599 patients who had the primary end point, 194 (32.4%) had been diagnosed with non-cardiac chest pain. These patients were younger, less likely to have typical symptoms, more likely to be south Asian and more likely to have a normal resting electrocardiogram than patients with angina who had the primary end point.

conclusionRACPCs are successful in identifying patients with incident angina who are at high coronary risk, but there is a need to reduce misdiagnosis and improve outcomes in patients diagnosed with non-cardiac chest pain who accounted for nearly one third of cardiac events during follow-up.

Indexed as

Angina PectorisChest PainCohort StudiesCoronary DiseaseDiagnostic ErrorsEnglandFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain ClinicsPrognosisRisk FactorsSensitivity and SpecificitySurvival Analysis

Identifiers

PMID16790531
PMCPMC1861500
OpenAlexW2110148421

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.