ArticleBMJ open2020
A prospective cohort study of self-reported computerised medical history taking for acute chest pain: protocol of the CLEOS-Chest Pain Danderyd Study (CLEOS-CPDS).
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03439449 (Computerized, Patient-entered Medical Histories for Managing Chest Pain in the Emergency Department), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 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.
Computerized, Patient-entered Medical Histories for Managing Chest Pain in the Emergency Department
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computerized Self-Reported Medical History Taking to Support Early Rule Out of Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Patients With Acute Chest Pain: Post Hoc Analysis of the CLEOS-CPDS Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
- Taking a closer look: Can an app improve diagnostic accuracy in urgent care? Cluster-randomized interventional trial DASI.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Patient Perspectives on Digital Technology and Experiences of Computerized History-Taking for Chest Pain Management in the Emergency Department: CLEOS-CPDS Prospective Cohort Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Performance of computerized self-reported medical history taking and HEAR score for safe early rule-out of cardiac events in acute chest pain patients: the CLEOS-CPDS prospective cohort study.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025Article
- Preserving Patient Stories: Bioethical and Legal Implications Related to the Shift from Traditional to Digital Anamnesis.Clinics and practice · 2024Review
- Are medical history data fit for risk stratification of patients with chest pain in emergency care? Comparing data collected from patients using computerized history taking with data documented by physicians in the electronic health record in the CLEOS-CPDS prospective cohort study.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Evaluating an app for digital medical history taking in urgent care practices: study protocol of the cluster-randomized interventional trial 'DASI'.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- User experience of self-reported computerized medical history taking for acute chest pain: The Clinical Expert Operating System Chest Pain Danderyd Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Digital Tools Designed to Obtain the History of Present Illness From Patients: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Obtaining patients' medical history using a digital device prior to consultation in primary care: study protocol for a usability and validity study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
- Improving Emergency Department Patient-Physician Conversation Through an Artificial Intelligence Symptom-Taking Tool: Mixed Methods Pilot Observational Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Use of Self-Reported Computerized Medical History Taking for Acute Chest Pain in the Emergency Department - the Clinical Expert Operating System Chest Pain Danderyd Study (CLEOS-CPDS): Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionManagement of acute chest pain focuses on diagnosis or safe rule-out of an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aim to determine the additional value of self-reported computerised history taking (CHT). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Prospective cohort study design with self-reported, medical histories collected by a CHT programme (Clinical Expert Operating System, CLEOS) using a tablet. Women and men presenting with acute chest pain to the emergency department at Danderyd University Hospital (Stockholm, Sweden) are eligible. CHT will be compared with standard history taking for completeness of data required to calculate ACS risk scores such as History, ECG, Age, Risk factors and Troponin (HEART), Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE), and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI). Clinical outcomes will be extracted from hospital electronic health records and national registries. The CLEOS-Chest Pain Danderyd Study project includes (1) a feasibility study of CHT, (2) a validation study of CHT as compared with standard history taking, (3) a paired diagnostic accuracy study using data from CHT and established risk scores, (4) a clinical utility study to evaluate the impact of CHT on the management of chest pain and the use of resources, and (5) data mining, aiming to generate an improved risk score for ACS. Primary outcomes will be analysed after 1000 patients, but to allow for subgroup analysis, the study intends to recruit 2000 or more patients. This ongoing project may lead to new and more effective ways for collecting thorough, accurate medical histories with important implications for clinical practice. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been reviewed and approved by the Stockholm Regional Ethical Committee (now Swedish Ethical Review Authority). Results will be published, regardless of the outcome, in peer-reviewed international scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study is registered at https://www.clinicaltrials.gov (unique identifier: NCT03439449).
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.