Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20530163›Full record

SynthesisCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne2010

Diagnostic accuracy of the TIMI risk score in patients with chest pain in the emergency department: a meta-analysis.

Erik P Hess, Dipti Agarwal, Subhash Chandra, Mohammed H Murad, Patricia J Erwin, Judd E Hollander, Victor M Montori, Ian G Stiell

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.7field-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.

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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 128 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Erik P HessDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Division of Emergency Medicine Research, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. hess.erik@mayo.edu
Dipti Agarwal
Subhash Chandra
Mohammed H Murad
Patricia J Erwin
Judd E Hollander
Victor M Montori
Ian G Stiell
WinnMed · USInstitute of Nutrition, Metabolism and Diabetes · CAMayo Clinic in Arizona · USMayo Clinic in Florida · USUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) risk score uses clinical data to predict the short-term risk of acute myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization or death from any cause. It was originally developed for use in patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. We sought to expand the clinical application of the TIMI risk score by assessing its prognostic accuracy in patients in the emergency department with potential acute coronary syndromes.

methodsWe searched five electronic databases, hand-searched reference lists of included studies and contacted content experts to identify articles for review. We included prospective cohort studies that validated the TIMI risk score in emergency department patients. We performed a meta-regression to determine whether a linear relation exists between TIMI risk score and the cumulative incidence of cardiac events.

resultsWe included 10 prospective cohort studies (with a total of 17 265 patients) in our systematic review. Data were available for meta-analysis in 8 of the 10 studies. Of patients with a score of zero, 1.8% had a cardiac event within 30 days (sensitivity 97.2%, 95% CI 96.4-97.8; specificity 25.0%, 95% CI 24.3-25.7; positive likelihood ratio 1.30, 95% CI 1.28-1.31; negative likelihood ratio 0.11, 95% CI 0.09-0.15). Meta-regression analysis revealed a strong linear relation between TIMI risk score (p < 0.001) and the cumulative incidence of cardiac events.

interpretationAlthough the TIMI risk score is an effective risk stratification tool for patients in the emergency department with potential acute coronary syndromes, it should not be used as the sole means of determining patient disposition.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalAgedChest PainConfidence IntervalsFemaleHumansLikelihood FunctionsMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionMyocardial RevascularizationPrognosisRegression AnalysisRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID20530163
PMCPMC2900327
OpenAlexW2155081321

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.