Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22012492›Full record

ReviewThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2011

Coronary artery calcium scoring and its impact on the clinical practice in the era of multidetector CT.

Jongmin Lee

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Coronary artery calcium in breast cancer survivors after radiation therapy.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2017
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

1 author.

Jongmin LeeDepartment of Radiology, Kyungpook National University and Hospital, 50 Sam-Duk 2 Ga, Jung Gu, Daegu 700-721, South Korea. jonglee@knu.ac.kr

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the suggestion of coronary artery calcium as an indicator of coronary artery disease 30 years ago, intense and controversial discussion regarding coronary artery calcium has been ongoing. Diverse techniques for evaluation of coronary artery calcium were suggested and validation of its feasibility has been followed up. Following establishment of reference standards, coronary artery calcium became widely utilized in clinical practice and scientific research. Originally coronary artery calcium scoring techniques were developed for prediction of cardiovascular risk. Additionally, coronary artery calcium scoring has been utilized as an indicator for other medical events. Recently, coronary artery calcium scoring used to be applied as a reference standard during scientific research. In this article, the topic of coronary artery calcium, from its introduction to its current usefulness, was discussed from the viewpoints of coronary artery calcium scoring techniques, imaging modalities, validation of the techniques, clinical feasibility of coronary artery calcium scoring beyond traditional cardiovascular risk prediction, and utilization of coronary artery calcium scoring as a reference standard. Popular coronary calcium scoring techniques comprises of Agatston, volume, and mass scores. Through validation of these techniques, pros and cons of each technique were analyzed and proper utility could be suggested. In parallel, the reference standards for Agatston and volume scores were established by age, sex, and race. Through the vigorous controversies, nowadays, the clinical feasibility of coronary artery calcium score as a surrogate marker of cardiovascular risk was acknowledged in the literature.

Indexed as

Age DistributionCalcinosisCalciumCoronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseaseHumansReproducibility of ResultsRiskRisk FactorsSensitivity and SpecificitySeverity of Illness IndexTomography, X-Ray ComputedValidation Studies as TopicCalcium

Identifiers

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.