ArticleNursing open2021
Specific prodromal symptoms in patients with acute coronary syndrome.
Article in Nursing open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Translation, validation, predictive analysis of the Italian version of the McSweeney Acute and Prodromal Myocardial Infarction Symptom Survey and symptom cluster characterization in women.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026Article
- Development of the Acute Coronary Syndrome Predictive Scale.Journal of caring sciences · 2024Article
- Article
- Specific prodromal symptoms in patients with acute coronary syndrome.Nursing open · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsAssessing the prodromal cardiac symptoms in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and compare them with healthy population.
backgroundIdentifying specific prodromal cardiac symptoms can play an important role in screening people at risk.
designA comparative study of prodromal symptoms.
methodsIn this comparison study, an 80-item checklist of prodromal symptoms was designed and completed by 337 participants in three groups (Patient group I, Patient group II and Healthy group). All participants were studied over a period of six months (from May to October 2017). SPSS-15 software was used to analyse the data.
resultsThe symptoms of pain/discomfort in chest, pain/discomfort centred in the superior part of chest, pain/discomfort in the left breast and numbness or burning of both arms were the most important symptoms to predict ACS incidence in the two patient groups (odds ratio > 4 and p ≤ .05).
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.