Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32875484›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2021

Validation and update of the minimal risk tool in patients suspected of chronic coronary syndrome.

Laust Dupont Rasmussen, Louise Nissen, Jelmer Westra, Lars Lyhne Knudsen, Lene Helleskov Madsen, Niels Ramsing Holm, Evald Høj Christiansen, Hans Erik Bøtker, Morten Bøttcher, Simon Winther

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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.

Laust Dupont RasmussenDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Unit West, Gødstrup Hospital, Gl. Landevej 61, 7400, Herning, Denmark. lausra@rm.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2790-2608
Louise NissenDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Unit West, Gødstrup Hospital, Gl. Landevej 61, 7400, Herning, Denmark.
Jelmer WestraDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Bouleevard 99, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark.
Lars Lyhne KnudsenDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Unit West, Gødstrup Hospital, Gl. Landevej 61, 7400, Herning, Denmark.
Lene Helleskov MadsenDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Unit West, Gødstrup Hospital, Gl. Landevej 61, 7400, Herning, Denmark.
Niels Ramsing HolmDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Bouleevard 99, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark.
Evald Høj ChristiansenDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Bouleevard 99, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark.
Hans Erik BøtkerDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Bouleevard 99, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark.
Morten BøttcherDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Unit West, Gødstrup Hospital, Gl. Landevej 61, 7400, Herning, Denmark.
Simon WintherDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Unit West, Gødstrup Hospital, Gl. Landevej 61, 7400, Herning, Denmark.

Funding

Hjerteforeningen 15-R99-A5837-22920
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Risk stratification in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) is important. Recently, the minimal-risk-tool (MRT) was developed to identify individuals with low CAD risk despite symptoms in order to avoid unnecessary testing. We aimed to validate and update the MRT-model in a contemporary cohort. The Dan-NICAD trial cohort, consisting of 1675 consecutive patients referred for coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA), was used to calculate the MRT-score based on the published fitted variable coefficients from the PROMISE and SCOT-HEART trials. Minimal risk was defined as zero calcium score, no coronary atherosclerosis at coronary CTA, and no cardiovascular events in the follow-up period. We tested an updated MRT-model by pooling the fitted variable coefficients from all three trials. A total of 1544 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were followed for 3.1 [2.7-3.4] years. In 710 (46%) patients, the criteria for minimal risk were fulfilled. Despite substantial coefficient variation, the MRTs based on the PROMISE, the SCOT-HEART and the updated MRT variables showed similar moderate to high discriminative performance for minimal risk estimation. Although all three models tended to underestimate minimal risk, the updated MRT had the best performance. Using a 75% minimal risk cut-off, the updated MRT showed a sensitivity of 11.6% (95% CI 9.3-14.2%) and specificity of 99.3% (95% CI 98.6-99.8%). An updated MRT model based on three large studies increased calibration compared to the existing MRT models, whereas discrimination was similar despite substantial coefficient variation. The updated MRT might supplement currently recommended pre-test probability models.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesAgedChronic DiseaseClinical Decision-MakingComputed Tomography AngiographyCoronary AngiographyDenmarkFemaleHeart Disease Risk FactorsHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial IschemiaPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCoronary artery diseaseMinimal riskPre-test probability

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.