Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24167394›Full record

ArticleActa informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH2013

Diagnostic Capabilities of 64 Slice CT Coronography Compared to Classic in Coronary Disease Detection.

Sanja Sehovic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Recent Trends in Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Coronary Atherosclerotic Plaque Characterization.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sanja SehovicSunce Polyclinics, Agram, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
University of Sarajevo · BA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCardiovascular disease, among which the most common is coronary disease of the hearth are the main cause of death at middle aged persons in the majority of European countries. Percent of cardiovascular disease in overall mortality among our population is even more than 50%. Up to 55 years of live myocardial infarction is by 5-6 times more common among men, and up to age of 75 years that difference decreases to 2.5 times. GOAL: The goal of this study is to determine the diagnostic value of 64 slices computerized tomography in detection of coronary disease compared to classic, invasive coronography. MATERIAL AND

methodsStudy included 50 patients, of both genders, at average age of 60 years. Patients underwent CT coronography as well as classic coronography.

resultsOur research prove that the sensitivity of MSCT coronography 92% with positive predictive value of 86%. Mayor difference was in the analysis of CX artery in the evaluation of significant and non-significant stenosis in application of these two methods. During the analysis of LAD and RCA artery there was no statistically significant difference in findings of these two methods.

conclusionCT coronography is non-invasive, comfortable and reliable method in coronary disease diagnostics. Thanks to its high sensitivity and PPV it enables reliable exclusion of coronary disease and takes significant place in a cardiovascular diseases diagnostic algorithm.

Indexed as

coronary diseases.coronographyCT coronography

Identifiers

PMID24167394
PMCPMC3804482
OpenAlexW2005562509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.