ArticleEuropean heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes2016
How should CT coronary angiography be integrated into the management of patients with chest pain and how does this affect outcomes?
Article in European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Coronary Magnetic Resonance Angiography in Chronic Coronary Syndromes.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Review
- Developing a lung nodule management protocol specifically for cardiac CT: Methodology in the DISCHARGE trial.European journal of radiology open · 2020Article
- Incremental value of stress echocardiography and computed tomography coronary calcium scoring for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2019Article
- Prevalence of obstructive coronary artery disease and prognosis in patients with stable symptoms and a zero-coronary calcium score.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2017Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
When examining the role of a diagnostic test in clinical practice, consideration must be placed not only on the accuracy of the result, but also its impact on patient care and outcomes. Proving a direct effect on outcomes may be difficult because the impact of the diagnostic test largely depends on the clinician's interpretation and consequent actions as well as the patient's response to changes in their diagnosis, investigations, and treatment. Recent major clinical trials of symptomatic patients with suspected coronary heart disease (CHD) have shown that computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) can markedly clarify the diagnosis and lead to major changes in patient investigation and management including the use of invasive angiography, preventative therapies, and coronary revascularization. Thus, when added to our existing clinical tools, such as exercise electrocardiography, CTCA represents a powerful method of identifying and excluding CHD. Furthermore, it can identify patients with prognostically relevant non-obstructive CHD and, with recent technological advances, will be able to assess the functional impact of anatomically detected coronary artery stenoses. Overall, the routine integration of CTCA into the investigation of patients with chest pain improves clinical diagnostic certainty that has led to better targeting of investigations and evidence-based treatments that have ultimately translated into improved clinical outcomes.
Identifiers
What 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.