ArticleEuropean heart journal. Imaging methods and practice2023
Pre-screening for non-diagnostic coronary computed tomography angiography.
Article in European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Indiscriminate coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) referrals for suspected coronary artery disease could result in a higher rate of equivocal and non-diagnostic studies, leading to inappropriate downstream resource utilization or delayed time to diagnosis. We sought to develop a simple clinical tool for predicting the likelihood of a non-diagnostic CCTA to help identify patients who might be better served with a different test. Methods and results: We developed a clinical scoring system from a cohort of 21 492 consecutive patients who underwent CCTA between February 2006 and May 2021. Coronary computed tomography angiography study results were categorized as normal, abnormal, or non-diagnostic. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to produce a model that predicted the likelihood of a non-diagnostic test. Machine learning (ML) models were utilized to validate the predictor selection and prediction performance. Both logistic regression and ML models achieved fair discriminate ability with an area under the curve of 0.630 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.618-0.641] and 0.634 (95% CI 0.612-0.656), respectively. The presence of a cardiac implant and weight >100 kg were among the most influential predictors of a non-diagnostic study. Conclusion: We developed a model that could be implemented at the 'point-of-scheduling' to identify patients who would be best served by another non-invasive diagnostic test.
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.