ArticleScientific reports2025
Development and validation of identification models for aortic dissection and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome in the emergency department.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Aortic dissection (AD) and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) are critical illnesses whose prompt identification within the emergency department is challenging. This study aimed to establish rapid discrimination models to differentiate between these conditions. Patients of the training set and validation set were collected from January 2020 to June 2023. All patients used their final diagnosis. Discriminant models were constructed via univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Based on the results of the two models, two web calculators were developed. A total of 1314 patients were included in the study, with 997 patients (399 AD patients and 598 NSTE-ACS patients) and 317 patients (132 AD patients and 185 NSTE-ACS patients) in the training and validation sets, respectively. The semi-model consisted of six clinical characteristics (age, heart rate, pulse pressure, temperature, hypertension, diabetes), with an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.792 and 0.823 in the training and validation sets. The whole-model included five clinical characteristics (age, pulse pressure, hypertension, diabetes) and two point-of-care test data (high sensitivity troponin I, D-dimer). It had a higher predictive value compared to the semi-model, with AUCs of 0.973 and 0.980 in the training and validation sets, respectively. Given the optimal cutoff point, the semi-model demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.716 and a specificity of 0.734, whereas the whole-model displayed a sensitivity of 0.930 and a specificity of 0.946. Both identification models can be used as reliable tools for rapidly identifying AD and NSTE-ACS.
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.