Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25252163›Full record

ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2014

Applicability of the Appropriate use Criteria for Myocardial Perfusion Scintigraphy.

Anderson de Oliveira, Maria Fernanda Rezende, Renato Corrêa, Rodrigo Mousinho, Jader Cunha Azevedo, Sandra Marina Miranda, Aline Ribeiro Oliveira, Ricardo Fraga Gutterres, Evandro Tinoco Mesquita, Cláudio Tinoco Mesquita

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Outcomes after inappropriate nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging: A meta-analysis.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2016
    Review
  4. 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

10 authors.

Anderson de OliveiraUniversidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, RJ, Brazil.
Maria Fernanda RezendeUniversidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, RJ, Brazil.
Renato CorrêaHospital Pró-Cardíaco, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Rodrigo MousinhoHospital Pró-Cardíaco, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Jader Cunha AzevedoUniversidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, RJ, Brazil.
Sandra Marina MirandaUniversidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, RJ, Brazil.
Aline Ribeiro OliveiraUniversidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, RJ, Brazil.
Ricardo Fraga GutterresComissão Nacional de Energia Nuclear, Brazil.
Evandro Tinoco MesquitaUniversidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, RJ, Brazil.
Cláudio Tinoco MesquitaUniversidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, RJ, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Appropriateness Criteria for nuclear imaging exams were created by American College of Cardiology (ACC) e American Society of Nuclear Cardiology (ASNC) to allow the rational use of tests. Little is known whether these criteria have been followed in clinical practice. Objective: To evaluate whether the medical applications of myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) in a private nuclear medicine service of a tertiary cardiology hospital were suitable to the criteria of indications proposed by the American medical societies in 2005 and 2009 and compare the level of indication of both. Methods: We included records of 383 patients that underwent MPS, November 2008 up to February 2009. Demographic characteristics, patient's origin, coronary risk factors, time of medical graduation and appropriateness criteria of medical applications were studied. The criteria were evaluated by two independent physicians and, in doubtful cases, defined by a medical expert in MPS. Results: Mean age was 65 ± 12 years. Of the 367 records reviewed, 236 (64.3%) studies were performed in men and 75 (20.4%) were internee. To ACC 2005, 255 (69.5%) were considered appropriate indication and 13 (3.5%) inappropriate. With ACC 2009, 249 (67.8%) were considered appropriate indications and 13 (5.2%) inappropriate. Conclusions: We observed a high rate of adequacy of medical indications for MPS. Compared to the 2005 version, 2009 did not change the results.

Identifiers

PMID25252163
PMCPMC4262097

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.