MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120616766

Chest pain with nondiagnostic electrocardiogram in the emergency department: a randomized controlled trial of two cardiac marker regimens.

2000· article· en· W2120616766 on OpenAlexaff
Eugene Dagnone, Christine E Collier, William Pickett, Naheed S. Ali, M. J. Miller, Debbie Tod, Ross Morton

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreKingston General HospitalQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentChest painMyocardial infarctionTroponinRandomized controlled trialEmergency medicineInternal medicineConfidence intervalCardiologyPhysical therapy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Early detection of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) may save lives. In the emergency setting, it is unclear whether the early use of certain cardiac markers (myoglobin and cardiac troponin I [cTnI]) assists in making appropriate decisions whether to admit or discharge patients with chest pain of possible ischemic cause who have nondiagnostic electrocardiograms (ECGs). We performed a study to determine whether the addition of new cardiac markers in the emergency department results in improved clinical decisions. METHODS: A single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted between June 1997 and June 1998 in a tertiary care emergency department in Kingston, Ont. Of 296 patients aged 30 years or more who presented to the emergency department with chest pain and nondiagnostic ECGs, 146 were randomly assigned to the intervention group (determination of baseline creatine kinase [CK] level, CK MB fraction and cTnI level, and myoglobin level at baseline and at 2 hours) and 150 to the control group (determination of baseline CK level and CK MB fraction). Outcome measures included the rate of admission to the inpatient cardiology service and length of stay in the emergency department. RESULTS: Of the 296 patients, 34 (11.5%) received a diagnosis of AMI in the emergency department, and 92 (31.1%) had chest pain of noncardiac cause. Patients in the intervention group were less likely than those in the control group to be admitted to the cardiology service (67 [45.9%] v. 81 [54.0%]). The absolute difference in the proportion (8.1% [95% confidence interval -3.3 to 19.5]), although potentially important clinically, was not statistically significant. The length of stay in the emergency department was essentially the same in the 2 study groups. At 30 days, the proportions of patients with a diagnosis of recurrent angina (58.2% in the intervention group and 58.0% in the control group) and AMI (12.3% and 14.7%) were also similar. INTERPRETATION: The optimal cardiac marker panel to be used in the emergency department remains unknown. The addition of serial testing of myoglobin with cTnI confirmation to the standard panel did not substantially change the clinical management or outcomes of patients presenting with chest pain and nondiagnostic ECGs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207