Diagnostic accuracy of echocardiography for pulmonary hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Right heart catheterisation is the gold standard for the diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension. However, echocardiography is frequently used to screen for this disease and monitor progression over time because it is non-invasive, widely available and relatively inexpensive. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis to determine the correlation of pulmonary pressures obtained by echocardiography versus right heart catheterisation and to determine the diagnostic accuracy of echocardiography for pulmonary hypertension. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Papers First, the Cochrane collaboration and the Cochrane Register of controlled trials were searched and were inclusive as of February 2010. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were only included if a correlation coefficient or the absolute number of true-positive, false-negative, true-negative and false-positive observations was available, and the 'reference standards' were described clearly. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted the data from each study. Quality was assessed with the quality assessment for diagnostic accuracy studies. A random effects model was used to obtain a summary correlation coefficient and the bivariate model for diagnostic meta-analysis was used to obtain summary sensitivity and specificity values. Results 29 studies were included in the meta-analysis.The summary correlation coefficient between systolic pulmonary arterial pressure estimated from echocardiography versus measured by right heart catheterisation was 0.70 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.73; n=27).The summary sensitivity and specificity for echocardiography for diagnosing pulmonary hypertension was 83% (95% CI 73 to 90) and 72% (95% CI 53 to 85;n=12), respectively. The summary diagnostic OR was 13(95% CI 5 to 31).Conclusions Echocardiography is a useful and noninvasive modality for initial measurement of pulmonary pressures but due to limitations, right heart catheterisation should be used for diagnosing and monitoring pulmonary hypertension.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.082 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.023 | 0.046 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".