ReviewReviews in cardiovascular medicine2021
Scoring systems for the triage and assessment of short-term cardiovascular risk in patients with acute chest pain.
Review in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modified HEART score to improve ruling out acute coronary syndrome at the emergency department.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- [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 · 2026Review
- Adult Triage in the Emergency Department: Introducing a Multi-Layer Triage System.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- HEART Score Agreement Between Attending and Resident Emergency Medicine Physicians for Patients With Potential Acute Coronary Syndrome.Ochsner journal · 2025Article
- Performance of the Risk Scores for Predicting In-Hospital Mortality in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome in a Chinese Cohort.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Predictive Value of the HEART Score Combined with Hypersensitive C-Reactive Protein for 30 d Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Acute Chest Pain.Emergency medicine international · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Acute chest pain is a common emergency department (ED) chief complaint. Evaluating patients for acute coronary syndrome is challenging because missing the diagnosis carries substantial morbidity, mortality, and medicolegal consequences. However, over-testing is associated with increased cost, overcrowding, and possible iatrogenic harm. Over the past two decades, multiple risk scoring systems have been developed to help emergency providers evaluate patients with acute chest pain. The ideal risk score balances safety by achieving high sensitivity and negative predictive value for major adverse cardiovascular events while also being effective in identifying a large proportion of patients for early discharge from the ED. This review examines contemporary risk scores used to risk stratify patients with acute chest pain.
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.