ArticleOpen access emergency medicine : OAEM2023
HEAR SCORE: A Proposal to Use Only Anamnestic and EKG Data to Evaluate Patients with Very Low Risk Chest Pain.
Article in Open access emergency medicine : OAEM, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Associations of weight-adjusted waist index with cardiovascular chest pain risk in U.S. adults.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2025Article
- Performance of computerized self-reported medical history taking and HEAR score for safe early rule-out of cardiac events in acute chest pain patients: the CLEOS-CPDS prospective cohort study.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025Article
- Assessment and Application of the Hear Score in Remote Emergency Medicine Outposts in Bosnia and Herzegovina.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Chest pain in a common symptom in patients attending Emergency Department worldwide and can be related to an extensive variety of disorders, so it represents a diagnostic and logistic challenge for Emergency physicians. The aim of this study is to identify a subgroup of patients with a low pre-test probability of major adverse cardiac events, for which there is no need of troponin testing, to avoid potential harm from false-positive testing and long length stay in ED. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data of patients that attended ED of Siena complaining chest pain from January 2019 to August 2021. We used a modified HEART score, only evaluating history, EKG, age and risk factors. A 0-1 HEAR score was considered at very low risk for adverse cardiac events. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and incidence of adverse cardiac events were calculated. The accuracy of HEAR score was evaluated with ROC curve. The correlation of adverse cardiac events with HEAR score 0-1 was evaluated with Fisher test. Results: In this study, we included 2046 patients, of which 279 were classified at very low risk. The incidence of adverse cardiac events in this population was 0.36%. Sensibility was 97.5%, sensitivity 61%, PPV 36.8%, NPV 99.1%. The AUC for global accuracy of HEAR score was 0.945. Chi-square's P value for the association between adverse cardiac events and HEAR score 0-1 was <0.001. Conclusion: The draft presented in this study answers to the necessity to make a personalized path for patients attending ED with chest pain. The choice to avoid troponin testing may appear risky, but data from this study and from other similar show that a careful evaluation of clinical data and EKG allows to correctly discriminate which patients will not have adverse cardiac events, reducing the length of stay in ED.
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.