Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28782082›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in cardiovascular medicine2017

Utility of Imaging in Risk Stratification of Chest Pain in Women.

Emily S Lau, Amy Sarma

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 85% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Emily S LauMassachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, USA. ELAU6@partners.org.
Amy SarmaMassachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, USA.
Massachusetts General Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

opinion statementRecent decades have seen a growing recognition that the understanding of sex differences in cardiovascular disease (CVD) is vital to optimal diagnosis and management, particularly of women (Mosca et al. Circulation 124:2145-54, 2011). There is simultaneously an increasing appreciation of the multifactorial nature of ischemic heart disease (IHD) in many patients, in whom disease may extend beyond the epicardial coronaries. While obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) remains underdiagnosed in women and still represents a major burden of disease, women also present with nonobstructive CAD more commonly than men (Patel et al. N Engl J Med 362:886-95, 2010). Indeed, microvascular dysfunction, coronary artery vasospasm, and coronary dissections contribute to a larger proportion of IHD in women than men (Bairey Merz et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 47:S21-9, 2006). Here, we review the symptom presentation of women with IHD and the noninvasive modalities used to risk stratify women with suspected IHD.

Indexed as

Cardiac imagingCoronary diseaseNoninvasive imagingWomen

Identifiers

PMID28782082
OpenAlexW2743977658

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.