Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23414575›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2013

Individual patient data meta-analysis for the clinical assessment of coronary computed tomography angiography: protocol of the Collaborative Meta-Analysis of Cardiac CT (CoMe-CCT).

Georg M Schuetz, Peter Schlattmann, Stephan Achenbach, Matthew Budoff, Mario J Garcia, Robert Roehle, Gianluca Pontone, Willem Bob Meijboom, Daniele Andreini, Hatem Alkadhi and 37 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Crown years for non-invasive cardiovascular imaging (Part IV): 30 years of cardiac computed tomography.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2013
    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

47 authors at 20 institutions in 16 countries.

Georg M SchuetzDepartment of Radiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Mitte, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, Berlin 10117, Germany.
Peter Schlattmann
Stephan Achenbach
Matthew Budoff
Mario J Garcia
Robert Roehle
Gianluca Pontone
Willem Bob Meijboom
Daniele Andreini
Hatem Alkadhi
Lily Honoris
Nuno Bettencourt
Jörg Hausleiter
Sebastian Leschka
Bernhard L Gerber
Matthijs Fl Meijs
Abbas Arjmand Shabestari
Akira Sato
Elke Zimmermann
Uwe J Schoepf
Axel Diederichsen
David A Halon
Vladimir Mendoza-Rodriguez
Ashraf Hamdan
Bjarne L Nørgaard
Harald Brodoefel
Kristian A Ovrehus
Shona Mm Jenkins
Bjørn A Halvorsen
Johannes Rixe
Mehraj Sheikh
Christoph Langer
Eugenio Martuscelli
Andrea Romagnoli
Arthur Jha Scholte
Roy P Marcus
Geir R Ulimoen
Koen Nieman
Hans Mickley
Konstantin Nikolaou
Jean-Claude Tardif
Thorsten Rc Johnson
Simone Muraglia
Benjamin Jw Chow
David Maintz
Michael Laule
Marc Dewey
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEErasmus MC · NLHumboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DEOdense University Hospital · DKThe Lundquist Institute · USUniversity of Rome Tor Vergata · ITAarhus University Hospital · DKAkershus University Hospital · NOCarmel Medical Center · ILCentro Cardiologico Monzino · ITCentro Hospitalar de Vila Nova de Gaia · PTDeutsches Herzzentrum der Charité · DEDeutsches Herzzentrum München · DEFreie Universität Berlin · DEFriedrich Schiller University Jena · DEGlasgow Royal Infirmary · GBHeart and Diabetes Center North Rhine-Westphalia · DEIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITKantonsspital St. Gallen · CH

Funding

UCLA Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000124 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI DUBINETT, STEVEN M. · 2012 to 2015
$57.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000124
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelled

backgroundCoronary computed tomography angiography has become the foremost noninvasive imaging modality of the coronary arteries and is used as an alternative to the reference standard, conventional coronary angiography, for direct visualization and detection of coronary artery stenoses in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Nevertheless, there is considerable debate regarding the optimal target population to maximize clinical performance and patient benefit. The most obvious indication for noninvasive coronary computed tomography angiography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease would be to reliably exclude significant stenosis and, thus, avoid unnecessary invasive conventional coronary angiography. To do this, a test should have, at clinically appropriate pretest likelihoods, minimal false-negative outcomes resulting in a high negative predictive value. However, little is known about the influence of patient characteristics on the clinical predictive values of coronary computed tomography angiography. Previous regular systematic reviews and meta-analyses had to rely on limited summary patient cohort data offered by primary studies. Performing an individual patient data meta-analysis will enable a much more detailed and powerful analysis and thus increase representativeness and generalizability of the results. The individual patient data meta-analysis is registered with the PROSPERO database (CoMe-CCT, CRD42012002780). METHODS/

designThe analysis will include individual patient data from published and unpublished prospective diagnostic accuracy studies comparing coronary computed tomography angiography with conventional coronary angiography. These studies will be identified performing a systematic search in several electronic databases. Corresponding authors will be contacted and asked to provide obligatory and additional data. Risk factors, previous test results and symptoms of individual patients will be used to estimate the pretest likelihood of coronary artery disease. A bivariate random-effects model will be used to calculate pooled mean negative and positive predictive values as well as sensitivity and specificity. The primary outcome of interest will be positive and negative predictive values of coronary computed tomography angiography for the presence of coronary artery disease as a function of pretest likelihood of coronary artery disease, analyzed by meta-regression. As a secondary endpoint, factors that may influence the diagnostic performance and clinical value of computed tomography, such as heart rate and body mass index of patients, number of detector rows, and administration of beta blockade and nitroglycerin, will be investigated by integrating them as further covariates into the bivariate random-effects model. DISCUSSION: This collaborative individual patient data meta-analysis should provide answers to the pivotal question of which patients benefit most from noninvasive coronary computed tomography angiography and thus help to adequately select the right patients for this test.

Indexed as

AgedAge FactorsCoronary AngiographyCoronary DiseaseFemaleHumansMaleMeta-Analysis as TopicPredictive Value of TestsSensitivity and SpecificitySex FactorsTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID23414575
PMCPMC3576350
OpenAlexW2169651735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.