Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31571437›Full record

ArticleClinical and experimental emergency medicine2019

Multicenter observational study on the reliability of the HEART score.

Nicola Parenti, Giuseppe Lippi, Maria Letizia Bacchi Reggiani, Antonio Luciani, Mario Cavazza, Antonello Pietrangelo, Alberto Vegetti, Lucio Brugioni, Laura Bonfanti, Gianfranco Cervellin

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and experimental emergency medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. [Advances in the application of the HEART score in patients with acute coronary syndromes].Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A Closer Look at the HEART Score.Cardiology research · 2022
    Review
  8. Interrater agreement of the HEART score history component: A chart review study.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Nicola ParentiEmergency Department, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy.
Giuseppe LippiSection of Clinical Biochemistry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Maria Letizia Bacchi ReggianiEmergency Department, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Antonio LucianiEmergency Department, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy.
Mario CavazzaEmergency Department, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Antonello PietrangeloInternal Department, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy.
Alberto VegettiInternal Department, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy.
Lucio BrugioniEmergency Department, University Hospital of Modena, Modena, Italy.
Laura BonfantiEmergency Department, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Gianfranco CervellinEmergency Department, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy.
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia · ITUniversity of Bologna · ITUniversity of Parma · ITUniversity of Verona · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo rapidly and safely identify the risk of developing acute coronary syndrome in patients with chest pain who present to the emergency department, the clinical use of the History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk Factors, and Troponin (HEART) scoring has recently been proposed. This study aimed to assess the inter-rater reliability of the HEART score calculated by a large number of Italian emergency physicians.

methodsThe study was conducted in three academic emergency departments using clinical scenarios obtained from medical records of patients with chest pain. Twenty physicians, who took the HEART score course, independently assigned a score to different clinical scenarios, which were randomly administered to the participants, and data were collected and recorded in a spreadsheet by an independent investigator who was blinded to the study's aim.

resultsAfter applying the exclusion criteria, 53 scenarios were finally included in the analysis. The general inter-rater reliability was good (kappa statistics [κ], 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.57 to 0.70), and a good inter-rater agreement for the high- and low-risk classes (HEART score, 7 to 10 and 0 to 3, respectively; κ, 0.60 to 0.73) was observed, whereas a moderate agreement was found for the intermediate-risk class (HEART score, 4 to 6; κ, 0.51). Among the different items of the HEART score, history and electrocardiogram had the worse agreement (κ, 0.37 and 0.42, respectively).

conclusionThe HEART score had good inter-rater reliability, particularly among the high- and low-risk classes. The modest agreement for history suggests that major improvements are needed for objectively assessing this component.

Indexed as

Acute coronary syndromeChest painEmergency service, hospitalHEART pathwayHEART score

Identifiers

PMID31571437
PMCPMC6774007
OpenAlexW2975571734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.