ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2026
An artificial intelligence prediction model for optimizing patient selection for cardiac imaging for the investigation of suspected coronary artery disease.
Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Nearly, 40% of patients undergoing elective invasive coronary angiography (ICA) are diagnosed with non-obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) or normal coronary anatomy, resulting in unnecessary risk exposure and increased costs to the healthcare system. In this study, we externally validate an artificial intelligence model for optimizing patient selection for ICA vs. coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) to reduce unnecessary ICAs. Methods and results: The model was trained on data from outpatients undergoing elective ICA at two cardiac centres in Ontario, Canada between 2008 and 2019. It uses 42 predictors including demographic characteristics, risk factors, and medical history (including ECG stress testing and/or functional imaging) to predict the probability of obstructive CAD. Geographical validation assessed the discrimination performance on patients seen at the other 20 cardiac centres in Ontario, Canada during the same period. Temporal validation evaluated the model's performance on outpatients receiving ICA at the original centres between 2020 and 2023. Reclassification analysis was employed to estimate health system impact. Subgroup analysis was used to assess model fairness. Following external validation, the model was updated on data from the entire outpatient population ( Conclusion: Use of the model could result in an absolute reduction of 27% in the proportion of ICAs that result in a diagnosis of normal/non-obstructive disease. This could contribute to a reduction in complications from ICA and more efficient utilization of cardiac catheterization lab capacity for higher-value cardiac interventions such as revascularization and structural procedures. Additionally, use of the model would create significant efficiencies for payors, given the much lower cost of CCTA compared with ICA. If implemented within clinical practice, the model has the potential to improve the patient experience and reduce existing health inequities.
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.