Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35484468›Full record

ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2023

Development and validation of ischemia risk scores.

Robert J H Miller, Alan Rozanski, Piotr J Slomka, Donghee Han, Heidi Gransar, Sean W Hayes, John D Friedman, Louise E J Thomson, Daniel S Berman

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Robert J H MillerDepartments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Alan RozanskiDepartments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Piotr J SlomkaDepartments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Donghee HanDepartments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Heidi GransarDepartments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Sean W HayesDepartments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
John D FriedmanDepartments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Louise E J ThomsonDepartments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Daniel S BermanDepartments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. bermand@cshs.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe likelihood of ischemia on myocardial perfusion imaging is central to physician decisions regarding test selection, but dedicated risk scores are lacking. We derived and validated two novel ischemia risk scores to support physician decision making.

methodsRisk scores were derived using 15,186 patients and validated with 2,995 patients from a different center. Logistic regression was used to assess associations with ischemia to derive point-based and calculated ischemia scores. Predictive performance for ischemia was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and compared with the CAD consortium basic and clinical models.

resultsDuring derivation, the calculated ischemia risk score (0.801) had higher AUC compared to the point-based score (0.786, p < 0.001). During validation, the calculated ischemia score (0.716, 95% CI 0.684- 0.748) had higher AUC compared to the point-based ischemia score (0.699, 95% CI 0.666- 0.732, p = 0.016) and the clinical CAD model (AUC 0.667, 95% CI 0.633- 0.701, p = 0.002). Calibration for both ischemia scores was good in both populations (Brier score  < 0.100).

conclusionsWe developed two novel risk scores for predicting probability of ischemia on MPI which demonstrated high accuracy during model derivation and in external testing. These scores could support physician decisions regarding diagnostic testing strategies.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseMyocardial Perfusion ImagingCoronary AngiographyHumansReproducibility of ResultsRisk FactorsROC CurveTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-PhotonCardiac stress testingCoronary artery diseaseMyocardial ischemiaSPECT myocardial perfusion imaging

Identifiers

PMID35484468

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.