Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17593989›Full record

ArticleThe Canadian journal of cardiology2007

High probability of disease in angina pectoris patients: is clinical estimation reliable?

Poul F Høilund-Carlsen, Allan Johansen, Werner Vach, Henrik Wulff Christensen, Mette Møldrup, Torben Haghfelt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Canadian journal of cardiology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Poul F Høilund-CarlsenDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark. pfhc@ouh.fyns-amt.dk
Allan Johansen
Werner Vach
Henrik Wulff Christensen
Mette Møldrup
Torben Haghfelt

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccording to most current guidelines, stable angina pectoris patients with a high probability of having coronary artery disease can be reliably identified clinically.

objectivesTo examine the reliability of clinical evaluation with or without an at-rest electrocardiogram (ECG) in patients with a high probability of coronary artery disease. PATIENTS AND

methodsA prospective series of 357 patients referred for coronary angiography (CA) for suspected stable angina pectoris were examined by a trained physician who judged their type of pain and Canadian Cardiovascular Society grade of pain. Pretest likelihood of disease was estimated, and all patients underwent myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) followed by CA an average of 78 days later. For analysis, the investigators focused on the approximate groups of patients with more severe disease, ie, typical angina (n=187), Canadian Cardiovascular Society grade 2 pain or higher (n=176) or high (higher than 85%) estimated pretest likelihood of disease (n=142).

resultsIn the three groups, 34% to 39% of male patients and 65% to 69% of female patients had normal MPS, while 37% to 38% and 60% to 71%, respectively, had insignificant findings on CA. Of the patients who had also an abnormal at-rest ECG, 14% to 21% of men and 42% to 57% of women had normal MPS. Sex-related differences were statistically significant.

conclusionsClinical prediction appears to be unreliable. Addition of at-rest ECG data results in some improvement, particularly in male patients, but it makes the high probability groups so small that the addition appears to be of limited clinical relevance.

Indexed as

Coronary AngiographyAngina PectorisCoronary Artery DiseaseElectrocardiographyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial IschemiaProbabilityProspective StudiesRadionuclide ImagingReproducibility of ResultsRisk FactorsTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon

Identifiers

PMID17593989
PMCPMC2651943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.