Systematic review, meta-analysis and economic modelling of diagnostic strategies for suspected acute coronary syndrome

Goodacre, S; Thokala, P; Carroll, C; Stevens, JW; Leaviss, J; Al Khalaf, M; Collinson, P; Morris, F; Evans, P; Wang, J

doi:10.3310/hta17010

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Extended Research Article

Toolkit

View Award

Study found that hospital admission for 10-hour troponin testing to diagnose myocardial infarction was unlikely to be cost-effective compared with high-sensitivity troponin testing at presentation, unless rapid decision-making and discharge was possible. There was insufficient evidence to support the routine use of alternative biomarkers alongside troponin or routine investigation with exercise ECG or CTCA in troponin-negative patients.

S Goodacre, P Thokala, C Carroll, JW Stevens, J Leaviss, M Al Khalaf, P Collinson, F Morris, P Evans & J Wang.

Detailed Author information
Detailed Author information

S Goodacre ^1,^*, P Thokala ¹, C Carroll ¹, JW Stevens ¹, J Leaviss ¹, M Al Khalaf ¹, P Collinson ¹, F Morris ¹, P Evans ¹, J Wang ¹

School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
^* Corresponding author Email: s.goodacre@sheffield.ac.uk

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Report Content

Full Report
Abstract
Plain English Summary
Plain Language Summary
Scientific Summary

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors. Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

Enter response message*

Name (title, first name, last name)*

Occupation / Job title*

Affiliation / Employer*

Email*

Other authors
For example, if you are responding as a team or group. Please ensure you include full names and separate these using commas

Statement of competing interests
We believe that readers should be aware of any competing interests (conflicts of interest).
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) define competing interests as including: financial relationships with industry (for example through employment, consultancies, stock, ownership, honoraria, and expert testimony), either directly or through immediate family; personal relationships; academic competition; and intellectual passion.

If yes, please provide details below

Enter response title*

Enter CAPTCHA What is eleven minus two?*

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document