ArticleScientific reports2025
Clinical performance validation and four diagnostic strategy assessments of high-sensitivity troponin I assays.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor in Acute Coronary Syndromes: Beyond Diagnosis Toward Biological Phenotyping and Risk Stratification.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Article
- Metabolic alterations and potential biomarkers in unstable angina investigated by lipidomic analysis.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Article
- 99th-Percentile Upper Reference Limit for the New Snibe High-Sensitivity Troponin I Assay in a Southeast Asian Population.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Correlation Between Cardiac Troponin Serum Concentration and Selected Parameters of Subclinical Cardiovascular Dysfunction in Patients With and Without Arterial Hypertension: Retrospective Cross-Sectional Analysis of Real-World Data.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Analytical Performance of the New Sysmex High-Sensitivity Troponin T Assay.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) includes conditions such as unstable angina (UA), non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). High-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) assays have been recommended as primary biomarkers for NSTEMI diagnosis due to their high sensitivity and specificity. However, there is no consensus on the optimal diagnostic strategy for early NSTEMI detection. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of four hs-cTnI-based strategies for suspected NSTEMI: Limit of Detection (LoB), Single Cut-off, hs-cTnI 0/1 h Algorithm, and hs-cTnI 0/2 h Algorithm, in a Chinese cohort and compare the performance of assays from different manufacturers. Performance verification was conducted, including LoB, LoD, LoQ, and precision analysis. Clinical samples from 267 ACS patients were analyzed using Hybiome hs-cTnI assays. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed based on sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and F1-score. The LoB strategy demonstrated 100% sensitivity but low PPV (14.0%). Both the hs-cTnI 0/1 h Algorithm and hs-cTnI 0/2 h Algorithm showed high diagnostic performance, with the 0/2 h algorithm providing the best overall. 89.0% accuracy, 93.3% sensitivity, and 73.68% F1-score. The hs-cTnI 0/2 h Algorithm offers the most reliable diagnostic performance for early NSTEMI diagnosis.
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.