ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2019
Trial design for assessing analytical and clinical performance of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assays in the United States: The HIGH-US study.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical and Economic Implications of High-Sensitivity Troponin-Informed Admission Strategies in Non-AMI Chest Pain.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Article
- Navigating the Observation Zone: Do Risk Scores Help Stratify Patients With Indeterminate High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponins?Circulation · 2024Article
- Outcomes in ED patients with non-specific ECG findings and low high-sensitivity troponin.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) assays have been developed that quantify lower cTnI concentrations with better precision versus earlier generation assays. hs-cTnI assays allow improved clinical utility for diagnosis and risk stratification in patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected acute myocardial infarction. We describe the High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin I Assays in the United States (HIGH-US) study design used to conduct studies for characterizing the analytical and clinical performance of hs-cTnI assays, as required by the US Food and Drug Administration for a 510(k) clearance application. This study was non-interventional and therefore it was not registered at clinicaltrials.gov.
methodsWe conducted analytic studies utilizing Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidance that included limit of blank, limit of detection, limit of quantitation, linearity, within-run and between run imprecision and reproducibility as well as potential interferences and high dose hook effect. A sample set collected from healthy females and males was used to determine the overall and sex-specific cTnI 99th percentile upper reference limits (URL). The total coefficient of variation at the female 99th percentile URL and a universally available American Association for Clinical Chemistry sample set (AACC Universal Sample Bank) from healthy females and males was used to examine high-sensitivity (hs) performance of the cTnI assays. Clinical diagnosis of enrolled subjects was adjudicated by expert cardiologists and emergency medicine physicians. Assessment of temporal diagnostic accuracy including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were determined at presentation and collection times thereafter. The prognostic performance at one-year after presentation to the emergency department was also performed. This design is appropriate to describe analytical characterization and clinical performance, and allows for acute myocardial infarction diagnosis and risk assessment.
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.