Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38781350›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2024

Are medical history data fit for risk stratification of patients with chest pain in emergency care? Comparing data collected from patients using computerized history taking with data documented by physicians in the electronic health record in the CLEOS-CPDS prospective cohort study.

Helge Brandberg, Carl Johan Sundberg, Jonas Spaak, Sabine Koch, Thomas Kahan

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT03439449 (Computerized, Patient-entered Medical Histories for Managing Chest Pain in the Emergency Department), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

NCT03439449 active not recruitingnot on this map

Computerized, Patient-entered Medical Histories for Managing Chest Pain in the Emergency Department

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorKarolinska InstitutetRan2017 to 2025Enrolled2,000ConditionsChest Pain, Acute Coronary SyndromeArmsCLEOS software program, Physician taken history
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Helge BrandbergDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm SE-182 88, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-1507-4099
Carl Johan SundbergDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm SE-171 77, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-7000-466X
Jonas SpaakDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm SE-182 88, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-2135-1294
Sabine KochDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm SE-171 77, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-7144-8740
Thomas KahanDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm SE-182 88, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-9909-4956

Funding

Danderyd University HospitalKarolinska InstitutetRegion Stockholm FoUI-954046Robert Bosch Stiftung 11.5.1000.0258.0Stiftelsen Hjärtat
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn acute chest pain management, risk stratification tools, including medical history, are recommended. We compared the fraction of patients with sufficient clinical data obtained using computerized history taking software (CHT) versus physician-acquired medical history to calculate established risk scores and assessed the patient-by-patient agreement between these 2 ways of obtaining medical history information. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was a prospective cohort study of clinically stable patients aged ≥ 18 years presenting to the emergency department (ED) at Danderyd University Hospital (Stockholm, Sweden) in 2017-2019 with acute chest pain and non-diagnostic ECG and serum markers. Medical histories were self-reported using CHT on a tablet. Observations on discrete variables in the risk scores were extracted from electronic health records (EHR) and the CHT database. The patient-by-patient agreement was described by Cohen's kappa statistics.

resultsOf the total 1000 patients included (mean age 55.3 ± 17.4 years; 54% women), HEART score, EDACS, and T-MACS could be calculated in 75%, 74%, and 83% by CHT and in 31%, 7%, and 25% by EHR, respectively. The agreement between CHT and EHR was slight to moderate (kappa 0.19-0.70) for chest pain characteristics and moderate to almost perfect (kappa 0.55-0.91) for risk factors.

conclusionsCHT can acquire and document data for chest pain risk stratification in most ED patients using established risk scores, achieving this goal for a substantially larger number of patients, as compared to EHR data. The agreement between CHT and physician-acquired history taking is high for traditional risk factors and lower for chest pain characteristics. CLINICAL

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03439449.

Indexed as

Chest PainElectronic Health RecordsEmergency Service, HospitalMedical History TakingAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentSwedenacute coronary syndromeartificial intelligencechest painmedical history takingmedical informatics

Identifiers

PMID38781350
PMCPMC11187423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.