ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2024
The predictive value of coronary artery calcium score combined with traditional risk factors for obstructive coronary heart disease in young people.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2024. 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.
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
objectivesThis study attempts to compare the predictive effects of several prediction models on obstructive coronary artery disease (OCAD) in young patients (30-50 years old), with a view to providing a new evaluation tool for the prediction of premature coronary artery disease (PCAD).
methodsA total of 532 hospitalized patients aged 30-50 were included in the study.All of them underwent coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) for suspected symptoms of coronary heart disease.Coronary artery calcium score (CACS) combined with traditional risk factors and pre-test probability models are the prediction models to be compared in this study.The PTP model was selected from the upgraded Diamond-Forrester model (UDFM) and the Duke clinical score (DCS).
resultsAll patients included in the study were aged 30-50 years. Among them, women accounted for 24.4%, and 355 patients (66.7%) had a CACS of 0. OCAD was diagnosed in 43 patients (8.1%). The CACS combined with traditional risk factors to predict the OCAD area under the curve of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) (AUC = 0.794,p < 0.001) was greater than the PTP models (AUC
conclusionThe predictive value of CACS combined with traditional risk factors for OCAD in young patients is better than the PTP models.
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.