Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27956440›Full record

ReviewClinical medicine (London, England)2016

Acute coronary syndromes.

Tushar Kotecha, Roby D Rakhit

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tushar KotechaRoyal Free Hospital and UCL Institute of Cardiovascular Science, London, UK.
Roby D RakhitRoyal Free Hospital and UCL Institute of Cardiovascular Science, London, UK.
The Royal Free Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the UK, there are over 80,000 admissions annually with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) involves primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), which is delivered via dedicated heart attack centres. Non-ST elevation-ACS (NSTE-ACS) accounts for two-thirds of ACS presentations, affecting an older cohort of patients - often with more complex comorbidities. Initial management is with anti-thrombotic therapy with a view to PCI within 24 hours for the most acute cases and within 72 hours for all others. However, varying management pathways and access to specialist cardiology services results in variable times to definitive treatment. Advances in the sensitivity of cardiac biomarkers and the use of risk assessment tools now enable rapid diagnosis within a few hours of symptom onset. Advances in invasive management and drug therapy have resulted in improved clinical outcomes with resultant decline in mortality associated with ACS.

Indexed as

Acute Coronary SyndromeDisease ManagementElectrocardiographyFemaleHematologic AgentsHumansMaleMyocardial InfarctionHematologic AgentsAcute coronary syndromenon-ST elevation acute coronary syndromenon-ST elevation ­myocardial infarctionST-elevation myocardial infarction

Identifiers

PMID27956440
PMCPMC6329574
OpenAlexW4242716587

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.