Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35575616›Full record

ArticleEuropean heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes2022

Prediction models as gatekeepers for diagnostic testing in angina patients with suspected chronic coronary syndrome.

Louise Hougesen Bjerking, Simon Winther, Kim Wadt Hansen, Søren Galatius, Morten Böttcher, Eva Prescott

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes, 2022. 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
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. One step closer to quantifying 'clinical likelihood' in pre-test probability.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Louise Hougesen BjerkingDepartment of Cardiology, Bispebjerg Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, 2400 Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-2802-0041
Simon WintherDepartment of Cardiology, Gødstrup Hospital, Herning, Denmark.
Kim Wadt HansenDepartment of Cardiology, Bispebjerg Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, 2400 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Søren GalatiusDepartment of Cardiology, Bispebjerg Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, 2400 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Morten BöttcherDepartment of Cardiology, Gødstrup Hospital, Herning, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-2116-2370
Eva PrescottDepartment of Cardiology, Bispebjerg Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, 2400 Copenhagen, Denmark.
University of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsAssessment of pre-test probability (PTP) is an important gatekeeper when selecting patients for diagnostic testing for coronary artery disease (CAD). The 2019 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines recommend upgrading PTP based on clinical risk factors but provide no estimates of how these affect PTP. We aimed to validate two published PTP models in a contemporary low-CAD-prevalence cohort and compare with the ESC 2019 PTP. METHODS AND

resultsPreviously published basic and clinical prediction models and the ESC 2019 PTP were validated in 42 328 patients (54% women) ≥30 years old without previous CAD referred for cardiac computed tomography angiography in a region of Denmark from 2008 to 2017. Obstructive CAD prevalence was 8.8%. The ESC 2019 PTP and basic model included angina symptoms, sex, and age, while the clinical model added diabetes mellitus family history of CAD, and dyslipidaemia. Discrimination was good for all three models [area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.75-0.77), 0.74 (0.73-0.75), and 0.76 (0.75-0.76), respectively]. Using the clinically relevant low predicted probability ≤5% of CAD cut-off, the clinical and basic models were well calibrated, whereas the ESC 2019 PTP overestimated CAD prevalence. At a cut-off of ≤5%, the clinical model ruled out 36.2% more patients than the ESC 2019 PTP, n = 23 592 (55.7%) vs. n = 8 245 (19.5%), while missing 824 (22.2%) vs. 132 (3.6%) cases of obstructive CAD.

conclusionA prediction model for CAD including cardiovascular risk factors was successfully validated. Implementation of this model would reduce the need for diagnostic testing and serve as gatekeeper if accepting a watchful waiting strategy for one-fifth of the patients.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseCoronary StenosisAdultAngina PectorisComputed Tomography AngiographyCoronary AngiographyFemaleHumansMaleRisk FactorsChronic coronary syndromeExternal validationPrediction modelPre-test probabilityRisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID35575616
OpenAlexW4280598667

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.