SynthesisBMC medicine2013
Diagnostic indicators of non-cardiovascular chest pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychological interventions for symptomatic management of non-specific chest pain in patients with normal coronary anatomy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Treatment efficacy for non-cardiovascular chest pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
- Assessment of the Technical Interpretability of Prehospital ECGs Performed by Medical and Nonmedical Teams in a French Emergency Medical System: A Descriptive Pilot Study.Emergency medicine international · 2026Article
- Article
- To Be, or Not to Be … Pectoral Angina? The Pain Is the Same, but the Etiology Is Different-A Case Report.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Latin American consensus on diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2024Article
- Rib Mediated Non-Cardiac Chest Pain: A Case Report.Cureus · 2020Article
- Extra-Esophageal Presentation of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: 2020 Update.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Predicting coronary artery disease: a comparison between two data mining algorithms.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Extracardiac findings on coronary computed tomography angiography in patients without significant coronary artery disease.European radiology · 2019Article
- A patient presenting painful chest wall swelling: Tietze syndrome.World journal of emergency medicine · 2019Article
- Article
- The role of oesophageal physiological testing in the assessment of noncardiac chest pain.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2018Review
- Prognosis of undiagnosed chest pain: linked electronic health record cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2017Article
- Prevalence and Overlap of Noncardiac Conditions in the Evaluation of Low-risk Acute Chest Pain Patients.Critical pathways in cardiology · 2015Article
- A non-ischaemic cause of elevated troponin.BMJ case reports · 2014Article
- Review
- [Latin American Consensus on the Diagnosis of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease].Acta gastroenterologica LatinoamericanaArticle
- [Approach to the Patient with Non-cardiogenic Chest Pain of Esophageal Origin].Acta gastroenterologica LatinoamericanaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-cardiovascular chest pain (NCCP) has a high healthcare cost, but insufficient guidelines exist for its diagnostic investigation. The objective of the present work was to identify important diagnostic indicators and their accuracy for specific and non-specific conditions underlying NCCP.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. In May 2012, six databases were searched. Hand and bibliography searches were also conducted. Studies evaluating a diagnostic test against a reference test in patients with NCCP were included. Exclusion criteria were having <30 patients per group, and evaluating diagnostic tests for acute cardiovascular disease. Diagnostic accuracy is given in likelihood ratios (LR): very good (LR+ >10, LR- <0.1); good (LR + 5 to 10, LR- 0.1 to 0.2); fair (LR + 2 to 5, LR- 0.2 to 0.5); or poor (LR + 1 to 2, LR- 0.5 to 1). Joined meta-analysis of the diagnostic test sensitivity and specificity was performed by applying a hierarchical Bayesian model.
resultsOut of 6,316 records, 260 were reviewed in full text, and 28 were included: 20 investigating gastroesophageal reflux disorders (GERD), 3 musculoskeletal chest pain, and 5 psychiatric conditions. Study quality was good in 15 studies and moderate in 13. GERD diagnosis was more likely with typical GERD symptoms (LR + 2.70 and 2.75, LR- 0.42 and 0.78) than atypical GERD symptoms (LR + 0.49, LR- 2.71). GERD was also more likely with a positive response to a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) test (LR + 5.48, 7.13, and 8.56; LR- 0.24, 0.25, and 0.28); the posterior mean sensitivity and specificity of six studies were 0.89 (95% credible interval, 0.28 to 1) and 0.88 (95% credible interval, 0.26 to 1), respectively. Panic and anxiety screening scores can identify individuals requiring further testing for anxiety or panic disorders. Clinical findings in musculoskeletal pain either had a fair to moderate LR + and a poor LR- or vice versa.
conclusionsIn patients with NCCP, thorough clinical evaluation of the patient's history, symptoms, and clinical findings can indicate the most appropriate diagnostic tests. Treatment response to high-dose PPI treatment provides important information regarding GERD, and should be considered early. Panic and anxiety disorders are often undiagnosed and should be considered in the differential diagnosis of chest pain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.