MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Your heart speaks survey programme - a global survey on the ANOCA patient journey (diagnosis)

2025· article· en· W7127705239 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S La, Robert Tavella, S Brown, Charles E. McCall, Alessandra Pompa, Therese Shumaker, J Beltrame

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChest painEthnic groupQuarter (Canadian coin)AnginaAllianceCoronary heart diseaseMedical diagnosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim The inadequate patient journey of those with chest pain and no significant blockages (also known as ANOCA; Angina with Non-Obstructive Coronary Arteries) have prompted the formation of support groups, namely the International Heart Spasms Alliance (IHSA). However, there is limited data supporting the ANOCA patient-reported diagnostic journey. Purpose To determine the patient-reported diagnostic journey of those with ANOCA. Methods The IHSA in collaboration with the University of Adelaide researchers launched a web-based series of surveys for patients with ANOCA via social media platforms and cardiologist distribution. The theme of the first survey is diagnosis. Results A total of 694 responses have been collected thus far. The average age was 57 ± 11.0 and 89% of participants were female. Participants were predominantly of a Caucasian ethnicity (92%), and most resided in North America (44%), Europe (38%) or Australia/Oceania (17%). Overall, the underlying patient-reported diagnoses included diseases of the large vessels (35%; i.e. vasospastic angina) small vessels (19%; i.e. coronary microvascular dysfunction), both vessels (36%) or unknown diagnosis (10%). One in 10 participants waited over 10 years from symptom onset to receiving a diagnosis, and 3 in 4 participants were at some stage told that their symptoms were non-cardiac in nature. Only 11% of participants received a diagnosis by the first attending clinician whereas some required over 10 physicians (5%) to receive a diagnosis. Prior to receiving a diagnosis, a quarter of the participants were seen in the emergency room over five times for their symptoms but were discharged without any new treatment or change to treatment. Half of the participants sought treatment from 2 or 3 clinicians after their diagnosis. At this baseline survey, 92% continue to experience angina with 28% reporting a poor quality of life from their symptoms, as assessed by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire. Conclusion Patients with ANOCA are often overlooked and experience delays in their diagnostic journey. Even when receiving a diagnosis, many continue to experience ongoing angina that affects their quality of life. Thus, increased awareness, physician recognition and adequate diagnosis are needed to foster further research and develop evidence-based guidelines for this increasingly recognised cardiovascular disorder.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→