ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2017
Downstream resource utilization following SPECT: Impact of age and gender.
Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Non-traditional factors affecting referral for coronary angiography following SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have identified a downstream referral age and gender bias for invasive coronary anatomy evaluation after single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT MPI). The present study evaluates if such bias still persists despite advancements in SPECT MPI and angiography. We hypothesized that women and patients ≥80 years old are less likely to undergo invasive coronary angiography after adjusting for clinical and scan variables.
methodsPatients (n = 3824) who referred to a nuclear cardiology laboratory at a tertiary medical center were retrospectively identified. Regression analysis tested age (<55; 55-69; 70-79; ≥80 years) and gender as predictors of diagnostic angiogram at 90 days post-SPECT after adjustment for known CAD, CAD risk equivalent, SSS, SDS, and LVEF.
resultsYounger patients were more likely to undergo an angiogram as compared to octogenarians (77% more likely if <55 years old, 69% if 55-69 years old, and 52% if 70-79 years old). No effect was found for gender.
conclusionsOlder patients were less likely to be referred for angiogram as compared to their younger counterparts. Further study is needed to determine which factors guide this decision-making process in older adults and the influence of these factors on the referral bias.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27324347What 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.