ArticleOpen heart2026
Retrospective analysis of the performance of the PROMISE minimal risk tool for patients presenting with recent onset stable chest pain.
Article in Open heart, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe PRECISE study demonstrated that the Prospective multicentre imaging study for evaluation of chest pain (PROMISE) Minimal risk score (PMRS) can identify patients with recent onset stable chest pain who could safely be reassured and discharged without further testing. Despite this observation, the PMRS is not in widespread use. The aim of this analysis was therefore to retrospectively evaluate the performance of the PMRS had it been applied as a decision tool in a real-world population.
methodsWe performed a retrospective cohort analysis of all stable chest pain referrals from 03 April 2023 to 30 August 2024. All elements of the PMRS were measured, along with key patient outcomes including subsequent investigations and cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction (MI) and all-cause mortality). Statistical analyses were conducted in accordance with the data type and distribution. The cohort was split into the minimal risk cohort (PMRS >0.46) and the remainder of the cohort (PMRS ≤0.46). A Kaplan-Meier curve, with log rank analysis, was created to compare the incidence of death/MI between the minimal risk and the remainder of the cohort.
resultsThis analysis included 3983 patients with a median age of 64 years (IQR 55-75 years) and 49.5% female. The median PMRS was 0.102 (IQR 0.041-0.257) with 10.9% (436) categorised as minimal risk (PMRS >0.46). In the minimal risk group, there were three CT coronary angiographies (0.7%) that demonstrated obstructive coronary disease. At a median follow-up of 306 days (IQR 177-428) there were no MI or deaths recorded in the minimal risk group.
conclusionThese data demonstrate that a PMRS >0.46 is associated with a very low frequency of significant coronary artery disease and MI or death. This proof of concept suggests that PMRS could be safely instituted into clinical practice to defer those patients at minimal risk from further investigations which would result in significant resource savings for healthcare services.
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.