Observational studyAcademic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine2024
Evaluating the performance of the HEART score in a Tanzanian emergency department.
Observational study in Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 2024. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational
- Time-stratified HEART score discrimination and calibration in emergency chest pain: a retrospective cohort study.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- How Close Are We to Patient-Side Troponin Testing?Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Multicomponent Intervention to Improve Acute Myocardial Infarction Care in Tanzania: Protocol for a Pilot Implementation Trial.JMIR research protocols · 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
12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe HEART score successfully risk stratifies emergency department (ED) patients with chest pain in high-income settings. However, this tool has not been validated in low-income countries.
methodsThis is a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study that was conducted in a Tanzanian ED from January 2019 through January 2023. Adult patients with chest pain were consecutively enrolled, and their presenting symptoms and medical history were recorded. Electrocardiograms and point-of-care troponin assays were obtained for all participants. Thirty-day follow-up was conducted, assessing for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization (coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention). HEART scores were calculated for all participants. Likelihood ratios, sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive values (NPVs) were calculated for each HEART cutoff score to predict 30-day MACEs, and area under the curve (AUC) was calculated from the receiver operating characteristic curve.
resultsOf 927 participants with chest pain, the median (IQR) age was 61 (45.5-74.0) years. Of participants, 216 (23.3%) patients experienced 30-day MACEs, including 163 (17.6%) who died, 48 (5.2%) with myocardial infarction, and 23 (2.5%) with coronary revascularization. The positive likelihood ratio for each cutoff score ranged from 1.023 (95% CI 1.004-1.042; cutoff ≥ 1) to 3.556 (95% CI 1.929-6.555; cutoff ≥ 7). The recommended cutoff of ≥4 to identify patients at high risk of MACEs yielded a sensitivity of 59.4%, specificity of 52.8%, and NPV of 74.7%. The AUC was 0.61.
conclusionsAmong patients with chest pain in a Tanzanian ED, the HEART score did not perform as well as in high-income settings. Locally validated risk stratification tools are needed for ED patients with chest pain in low-income countries.
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.