Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39600828›Full record

ReviewUS cardiology2022

Contemporary Risk Stratification of Acute Coronary Syndrome.

Gurleen Kaur, Swati Chand, Devesh Rai, Bipul Baibhav, Ron Blankstein, Debabrata Mukherjee, Phillip Levy, Martha Gulati

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in US cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Gurleen KaurDepartment of Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital Boston, MA.
Swati ChandDepartment of Internal Medicine, Rochester General Hospital Rochester, NY.
Devesh RaiDepartment of Cardiology, Sands-Constellation Heart Institute, Rochester Regional Health Rochester, NY.
Bipul BaibhavDepartment of Cardiology, Sands-Constellation Heart Institute, Rochester Regional Health Rochester, NY.
Ron BlanksteinCardiovascular Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital Boston, MA.
Debabrata MukherjeeDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center at El Paso El Paso, TX.
Phillip LevyDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Wayne State University Detroit, MI.
Martha GulatiDepartment of Cardiology, Barbra Streisand Women's Heart Center, Cedars-Sinai Smidt Heart Institute Los Angeles, CA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chest pain is one of the most common presenting concerns of patients seeking care in the emergency department, and the underlying etiology can range from acute coronary syndrome to various other non-cardiac causes. Initial evaluation should focus on characterizing symptoms and identifying risk factors, but further risk stratification using clinical decision pathways and biomarkers (cardiac troponin) is essential. The 2021 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain represent the first ever guidelines for the evaluation of patients with acute chest pain. The contemporary risk stratification methods described in these guidelines allow for the identification of patient subgroups: patients who do not require further testing, patients who should proceed directly to the cath lab, and patients who will benefit from further anatomic or functional testing. In this review, we describe contemporary risk stratification methods for acute coronary syndrome and summarize the recommendations put forth by the guidelines.

Indexed as

acute coronary syndromeChest painclinical decision pathwaycoronary artery diseasecoronary CT angiographyhigh sensitivity-troponinstress testing

Identifiers

PMID39600828
PMCPMC11588174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.