ArticleEmergency medicine journal : EMJ2018
Do all HEART Scores beat the same: evaluating the interoperator reliability of the HEART Score.
Article in Emergency medicine journal : EMJ, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review, Quality Assessment, and Synthesis of Guidelines for Emergency Department Care of Transgender and Gender-diverse People: Recommendations for Immediate Action to Improve Care.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Pre-hospital rule-out of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome by a single troponin: final one-year outcomes of the ARTICA randomised trial.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2024Trial
- Rule-out of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome by a single, pre-hospital troponin measurement: a randomized trial.European heart journal · 2023Trial
- Performance of the HEART Score in pre-hospital settings for suspected non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: The POPular HEART Study.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2026Article
- Towards prehospital risk stratification using deep learning for ECG interpretation in suspected acute coronary syndrome.BMJ health & care informatics · 2025Article
- Rapid outpatient evaluation for emergency department patients with intermediate risk chest pain safely reduces admissions.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2024Article
- Pre-hospital evaluation of chest pain patients using the modified HEART-score: rationale and design.Future cardiology · 2024Observational
- Interrater agreement of the HEART score history component: A chart review study.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2022Article
- Implementation of the ESC 0 h/1h algorithm and the HEART score in the emergency department: A prospective cohort study.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Provider Assessment of Clinical History When Using the HEART Score.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2022Article
- Scoring systems for the triage and assessment of short-term cardiovascular risk in patients with acute chest pain.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Review
- A Prospective Evaluation of Clinical HEART Score Agreement, Accuracy, and Adherence in Emergency Department Chest Pain Patients.Annals of emergency medicine · 2021Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients presenting with chest pain represent a significant proportion of attendances to the ED. The History, ECG, Age, Risk Factors and Troponin (HEART) Score is validated for the risk stratification of suspected ischaemic chest pain within the ED. The goal of this research was to establish the interoperator reliability of the HEART Score as performed in the ED by different grades of doctor and nurse. METHODOLOGY: Patients with suspected ischaemic chest pain presenting to the ED of an inner city, London Hospital, were recruited prospectively between January and May 2016. Patients that had been enrolled in the study were interviewed by clinicians from four different categories: senior doctor, junior doctor, senior nurse and junior nurse. Clinicians, blinded to other raters' results, calculated the HEART Scores for each patient with the assistance of a pocket-sized HEART Score card. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated as the primary measure of reliability. 120 patients were required to achieve a desired power of 80%.
results88 complete comparisons were obtained. There were no significant differences between the distributions of HEART Scores for each clinician group (p=0.95). The ICC for the overall HEART Score was 0.91 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.93). The ICC for troponin and age were '1', for 'history' 0.41 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.52), 'ECG' 0.64 (95% CI 0.54 to0.73) and 'risk factors' 0.84 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.89).
conclusionThis study demonstrates very strong overall interoperator reliability between the four groups of clinicians studied. This suggests that the HEART Score is reproducible when used by different professional groups and grade of clinician.
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.