ArticleHeliyon2023
Development and validation of a simple model to predict functionally significant coronary artery disease in Chinese populations: A two-center retrospective study.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study sought to derive and validate a simple model combining traditional clinical risk factors with biomarkers and imaging indicators easily obtained from routine preoperative examinations to predict functionally significant coronary artery disease (CAD) in Chinese populations. Methods: We developed five models from a derivation cohort of 320 patients retrospective collected. In the derivation cohort, we assessed each model discrimination using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), reclassification using the integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) and net reclassification improvement (NRI), calibration using the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, and clinical benefit using decision curve analysis (DCA) to derive the optimal model. The optimal model was internally validated by bootstrapping, and external validation was performed in another cohort including 96 patients. Results: The optimal model including 5 predictors (age, sex, hyperlipidemia, hs-cTnI and LVEF) achieved an AUC of 0.807 with positive NRI and IDI in the derivation cohort. Moreover, the Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed a good fit, and the DCA demonstrated good clinical net benefit. The C-statistic calculated by bootstrapping internal validation was 0.798, and the calibration curve showed adequate calibration (Brier score = 0.179). In the external validation cohort, the optimal model performance was acceptable (AUC = 0.704; Brier score = 0.20). Finally, a nomogram based on this model was constructed to facilitate its use in clinical practice. Conclusions: A simple model combined clinical risk factors with hs-cTnI and LVEF improving the prediction of functionally significant CAD in Chinese populations. This attractive model may be a choice for clinicians to risk stratification for CAD.
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.