SynthesisPloS one2018
Diagnostic accuracy of adding copeptin to cardiac troponin for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Serial high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T measurements to rule out acute myocardial infarction and a single high baseline measurement for swift rule-in: A systematic review and meta-analysis.European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care · 2020Pooled it
- Copeptin in Acute Myocardial Infarction: Is There a Role in the Era of High-Sensitivity Troponins?Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- The Emerging Role of Copeptin.The Clinical biochemist. Reviews · 2021Review
- Performance of Copeptin for Early Diagnosis of Acute Myocardial Infarction in an Emergency Department Setting.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of adding copeptin to cardiac troponin (cTn) on admission to the emergency department (ED) for non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) compared to cTn alone. MATERIALS AND
methodsA literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed (search date: April 13, 2018). Primary studies were included if they accurately reported on patients with symptoms suggestive of acute myocardial infarction and measured both cTn alone and cTn with copeptin upon admission to the ED. The patients with evidence of ST elevation myocardial infarction were excluded. To assess the risk of bias for the included studies, the QUADAS-2 tool was used.
resultsThe study participants included a total of 7,998 patients from 14 observational studies. The addition of copeptin to cTn significantly improved the sensitivity (0.81 [0.74 to 0.87] vs. 0.92 [0.89 to 0.95], respectively, p <0.001) and negative predictive value (0.96 [0.95 to 0.98] vs. 0.98 [0.96 to 0.99], respectively, p <0.001) at the expense of lower specificity (0.88 [0.80 to 0.97] vs. 0.57 [0.49 to 0.65], respectively, p <0.001) compared to cTn alone. Furthermore, adding copeptin to cTn showed significantly lower diagnostic accuracy for NSTEMI compared to cTn alone (0.91[0.90 to 0.92] vs. 0.85 [0.83 to 0.86], respectively, p < 0.001).
conclusionsAdding copeptin to cTn improved the sensitivity and negative predictive value for the diagnosis of NSTEMI compared to cTn alone. Thus, adding copeptin to cTn might help to screen NSTEMI early upon admission to the ED.
Indexed as
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.