ArticleYonsei medical journal2022
Comparison of Prognosis According to the Use of Emergency Medical Services in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.
Article in Yonsei medical journal, 2022. 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.
- Impact of Wechat-based prehospital data transmission on reperfusion times in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a prospective observational study.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Remnant Cholesterol Levels at Diagnosis May Predict Acute Coronary Syndrome Occurrence During Follow-Up in Patients with Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Management of high-flow arteriovenous access.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2025Article
- A timeliness analysis of emergency services and cardiovascular outcomes in cardiac patients referred through prehospital emergency services between 2020 and 2023: a cross-sectional study in Iran.BMC research notes · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to compare long-term clinical outcomes according to the use of emergency medical services (EMS) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who arrived at the hospital within 12 hr of symptom onset. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 13104 patients with acute myocardial infarction were enrolled in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institutes of Health from October 2011 to December 2015. Of them, 2416 patients with STEMI who arrived at the hospital within 12 hr were divided into two groups: 987 patients in the EMS group and 1429 in the non-EMS group. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce bias from confounding variables. After PSM, 796 patients in the EMS group and 796 patients in the non-EMS group were analyzed. The clinical outcomes during 3 years of clinical follow-up were compared between the two groups according to the use of EMS.
resultsThe symptom-to-door time was significantly shorter in the EMS group than in the non-EMS group. The EMS group had more patients with high Killip class compared to the non-EMS group. The rates of all-cause death and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were not significantly different between the two groups. After PSM, the rate of all-cause death and MACE were still not significantly different between the EMS and non-EMS groups. The predictors of mortality were high Killip class, renal dysfunction, old age, long door-to-balloon time, long symptom-to-door time, and heart failure.
conclusionEMS utilization was more frequent in high-risk patients. The use of EMS shortened the symptom-to-door time, but did not improve the prognosis in this cohort.
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.