ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2014
Cost-effectiveness of different diagnostic strategies in suspected stable coronary artery disease in Portugal.
Article in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of modeling approaches to evaluate diagnostics programs for stable coronary heart disease: suggestions for future health economic models.Health economics review · 2026Review
- Economic evaluation of single-photon emission-computed tomography versus stress echocardiography in stable chest pain patients.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of CCTA in SUS, as Compared to Other Non-Invasive Imaging Modalities in Suspected Obstructive CAD.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness for imaging stable ischemic disease.The British journal of radiology · 2020Review
- Additional value of associating aortic valve calcification to coronary calcium as a gatekeeper for coronary tomography angiography.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2015Article
- Computed tomography imaging of early coronary artery lesions in stable individuals with multiple cardiovascular risk factors.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2015Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCost-effectiveness is an increasingly important factor in the choice of a test or therapy.
objectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of various methods routinely used for the diagnosis of stable coronary disease in Portugal.
methodsSeven diagnostic strategies were assessed. The cost-effectiveness of each strategy was defined as the cost per correct diagnosis (inclusion or exclusion of obstructive coronary artery disease) in a symptomatic patient. The cost and effectiveness of each method were assessed using Bayesian inference and decision-making tree analyses, with the pretest likelihood of disease ranging from 10% to 90%.
resultsThe cost-effectiveness of diagnostic strategies was strongly dependent on the pretest likelihood of disease. In patients with a pretest likelihood of disease of ≤50%, the diagnostic algorithms, which include cardiac computed tomography angiography, were the most cost-effective. In these patients, depending on the pretest likelihood of disease and the willingness to pay for an additional correct diagnosis, computed tomography angiography may be used as a frontline test or reserved for patients with positive/inconclusive ergometric test results or a calcium score of >0. In patients with a pretest likelihood of disease of ≥ 60%, up-front invasive coronary angiography appears to be the most cost-effective strategy.
conclusionsDiagnostic algorithms that include cardiac computed tomography angiography are the most cost-effective in symptomatic patients with suspected stable coronary artery disease and a pretest likelihood of disease of ≤50%. In high-risk patients (pretest likelihood of disease ≥ 60%), up-front invasive coronary angiography appears to be the most cost-effective strategy. In all pretest likelihoods of disease, strategies based on ischemia appear to be more expensive and less effective compared with those based on anatomical tests.
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.