Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26623010›Full record

ArticleBiomedical reports2015

Diagnostic markers of acute myocardial infarction.

Sabesan Mythili, Narasimhan Malathi

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

92 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Fractional Flow Reserve-Based Patient Risk Classification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Sabesan MythiliDepartment of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Dental Sciences, Sri Ramachandra University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600116, India.
Narasimhan MalathiDepartment of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Dental Sciences, Sri Ramachandra University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600116, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The highest risk of fatality occurs within the initial hours of onset of AMI. Thus, early diagnosis of cardiac ischemia is critical for the effective management of patients with AMI. Improper diagnosis of patients with chest pain often leads to inappropriate admission of patients without AMI and vice versa. In addition to clinical history, physical examination, accurate electrocardiogram findings and assessment of cardiac biomarkers have an important role in the early diagnosis of acute ischemia. The present review discusses in detail the various cardiac biomarkers released during the event of an AMI.

Indexed as

acute myocardial infarctionatherosclerosisbiomarkerselectrocardiogram

Identifiers

PMID26623010
PMCPMC4660641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.