• About
  • Masthead
  • License Content
  • Advertise
  • Submit Press Release
  • RSS/Email List
  • 2MM Podcast
  • Write for us
  • Contact Us
2 Minute Medicine
No Result
View All Result

No products in the cart.

SUBSCRIBE
  • About
  • Specialties
    • All Specialties, All Recent Reports
    • Cardiology
    • Chronic Disease
    • Dermatology
    • Emergency
    • Endocrinology
    • Gastroenterology
    • Imaging and Intervention
    • Infectious Disease
    • Nephrology
    • Neurology
    • Obstetrics
    • Oncology
    • Ophthalmology
    • Pediatrics
    • Pharma
    • Preclinical
    • Psychiatry
    • Public Health
    • Pulmonology
    • Rheumatology
    • Surgery
  • Tools+
    • EvidencePulse™
    • HypeCheck™
    • NPI Registry Lookup
    • RVU Search
  • Pharma
  • AI Roundup
  • The Scan+
  • Classics™+
    • 2MM+ Online Access
    • Paperback and Ebook
  • Rewinds
  • Partners
    • License Content
    • Submit Press Release
    • Advertise with Us
  • Account
    • Subscribe
    • My account
    • Cart
    • Sign-in
2 Minute Medicine
  • About
  • Specialties
    • All Specialties, All Recent Reports
    • Cardiology
    • Chronic Disease
    • Dermatology
    • Emergency
    • Endocrinology
    • Gastroenterology
    • Imaging and Intervention
    • Infectious Disease
    • Nephrology
    • Neurology
    • Obstetrics
    • Oncology
    • Ophthalmology
    • Pediatrics
    • Pharma
    • Preclinical
    • Psychiatry
    • Public Health
    • Pulmonology
    • Rheumatology
    • Surgery
  • Tools+
    • EvidencePulse™
    • HypeCheck™
    • NPI Registry Lookup
    • RVU Search
  • Pharma
  • AI Roundup
  • The Scan+
  • Classics™+
    • 2MM+ Online Access
    • Paperback and Ebook
  • Rewinds
  • Partners
    • License Content
    • Submit Press Release
    • Advertise with Us
  • Account
    • Subscribe
    • My account
    • Cart
    • Sign-in
SUBSCRIBE
2 Minute Medicine
Subscribe
Home All Specialties Cardiology

Computer more accurate than clinical gestalt in predicting ACS

byAndrew Bishara
September 27, 2013
in Cardiology, Public Health
Reading Time: 3 mins read
Computer more accurate than clinical gestalt in predicting ACS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Image: PD

1. In a low-risk population, a computerized attribute matching program predicted acute coronary syndrome (ACS) but not ;ulmonary embolism (PE) more accurately than clinical gestalt. 

2. Clinical gestalt significantly overestimated the likelihood of ACS, with a mean pretest probability estimate of 17% when the true rate in the study population was 2.7%.

Evidence Rating Level: 2 (Good)

Study Rundown: In this study, a validated, computer-derived technique performed better than clinical gestalt in diagnosing acute coronary syndrome but not pulmonary embolism.  These findings are consistent with other studies comparing diagnostic accuracy of clinical gestalt and logistic regression-based models for cardiopulmonary diagnoses. The lower accuracy for ACS was heavily influenced by its low specificity (ie high rate of testing patients without disease), which may be driven by the threat of litigation. More accurate methods of predicting likelihood of ACS and PE could significantly reduce the medical costs associated with extensive diagnostic work-up’s.

Click to read the study in Annals of Emergency Medicine

RELATED REPORTS

Near-point-of-care molecular test accurately detects pulmonary tuberculosis

The efficacy 3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy is similar to 12 months in patients with acute coronary syndrome

Routine confirmatory testing for primary aldosteronism may have low diagnostic value

Relevant Reading: Clinical decision rules for excluding pulmonary embolism: a meta-analysis

In-Depth [prospective cohort study]: This study compared computerized attribute matching with clinical gestalt in estimating pretest probability of acute coronary syndrome and pulmonary embolism. Participants included adult patients with dyspnea and chest pain from four emergency departments (three academic and one community). Pretest probabilities for both ACS and PE were derived from clinical gestalt and from attribute matching. The latter is a computer program that compares a patients’ profile of clinical predictors as entered by the clinician with large databases of patients with identical profiles, and derives a percentage probability. Patients were followed for outcomes (ACS or PE confirmed by labs or imaging) at 90 days through telephone questionnaires and a review of the hospital’s EMR. 840 patients were enrolled and evaluated by emergency physicians, third year residents, or physician assistants; of these, 23 were diagnosed with ACS and 15 with PE. In comparing pretest probabilities by area under the receiver operating characteristic curves, clinical gestalt compared favorably with the computer program for PE but was less accurate for ACS. Clinical gestalt resulted in higher estimates of likelihood ACS (17% vs 4%) and PE (12% vs 6%) in a relatively low-risk population (2.7% acute coronary syndrome; 1.8% pulmonary embolism).

By Elizabeth Kersten and Andrew Bishara

More from this author: Outreach increases colorectal cancer screening among underserved; Clinical impression not reliable in identifying drug-seeking behavior; Industry influences on expert panels contribute to over-diagnosis; Undervaccination becoming more common, associated with increased patient admission rates; Overuse of colonoscopy widespread in the US; Silent myocardial infarctions more common than previously assumed

© 2013 2minutemedicine.com. All rights reserved. No works may be reproduced without expressed written consent from 2minutemedicine.com. Disclaimer: We present factual information directly from peer reviewed medical journals. No post should be construed as medical advice and is not intended as such by the authors, editors, staff or by 2minutemedicine.com. PLEASE SEE A HEALTHCARE PROVIDER IN YOUR AREA IF YOU SEEK MEDICAL ADVICE OF ANY SORT.  

Tags: ACSclinical gestaltcomputer technologydiagnostic accuracyPE
Previous Post

Hopkins Frailty Score is best predictor of postoperative complications

Next Post

Radial artery harvest comparable to saphenous vein harvest for cardiac bypass

RelatedReports

Shorter moxifloxacin-containing regimens ineffective for treating TB [REMoxTB trial]
Infectious Disease

Near-point-of-care molecular test accurately detects pulmonary tuberculosis

May 4, 2026
Using HEART score to risk stratify patients with chest pain is safe but underutilized in the ED
Cardiology

The efficacy 3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy is similar to 12 months in patients with acute coronary syndrome

January 12, 2026
Surgical site anesthetic infusion may enhance analgesia after mastectomy
Endocrinology

Routine confirmatory testing for primary aldosteronism may have low diagnostic value

May 5, 2025
Quick Take: Hospital volume and outcomes for acute pulmonary embolism
Cardiology

Analysis of clinical outcomes utilizing ultrasound-assisted catheter-directed thrombolysis for pulmonary embolism

April 30, 2025
Next Post
Everolimus only protects against early cardiac allograft vasculopathy

Radial artery harvest comparable to saphenous vein harvest for cardiac bypass

Lifestyle intervention in obese diabetics does not affect cardiovascular events

Alefacept may be effective therapy in newly diagnosed type 1 diabetics

Secondary mastoid obliteration improves quality of life for patients with chronic otitis media

Secondary mastoid obliteration improves quality of life for patients with chronic otitis media

EvidencePulse™ by 2 Minute Medicine 2026 evidence scan 3 reports You asked top stroke trials 2026 Synthesizing medical evidence... Top 2026 stroke trial results: OCEANIC — ischemic stroke: 6.2% vs 8.4% OPTION* — mRS 0–1: 43.6% vs 34.2% ORIENTAL* — mRS 0–2: 58.6% vs 46.6% *Higher sICH in intervention arms Participants randomizedN OCEANIC 12,327 OPTION 570 ORIENTAL 564 Ask about guidelines or landmark trials... ↑ Try EvidencePulse™ Ask the evidence.
Get the signal.
Try it now → Physician-trained medical AI by 2 Minute Medicine

2MM+ All Access

Full details →
$4.99 /month

5-day free trial · cancel anytime

  • ✓100+ physician-written reports
  • ✓EvidencePulse™ + HypeCheck™
  • ✓Ad-free reading + newsletters
Start 5-day free trial

Then $4.99/month. Manage renewal in your account.

2 Minute Medicine® is an award winning, physician-run, expert medical media company. Our content is curated, written and edited by practicing health professionals who have clinical and scientific expertise in their field of reporting. Our editorial management team is comprised of highly-trained MD physicians. Join numerous brands, companies, and hospitals who trust our licensed content.

Recent Reports

  • 2MM: AI Roundup: FDA clears autonomous blood draw robot, UHS acquires Talkspace, Databricks reaches $190 billion valuation, and AI-designed glioblastoma vaccine advances
  • Aletta brings autonomous robotics into routine blood collection
  • Higher coffee intake is associated with lower visceral fat despite similar body mass index
License Content
Terms of Use | Disclaimer
Cookie Policy
Cleantalk Pixel
  • About
  • Specialties
    • All Specialties, All Recent Reports
    • Cardiology
    • Chronic Disease
    • Dermatology
    • Emergency
    • Endocrinology
    • Gastroenterology
    • Imaging and Intervention
    • Infectious Disease
    • Nephrology
    • Neurology
    • Obstetrics
    • Oncology
    • Ophthalmology
    • Pediatrics
    • Pharma
    • Preclinical
    • Psychiatry
    • Public Health
    • Pulmonology
    • Rheumatology
    • Surgery
  • Tools
    • EvidencePulse™
    • HypeCheck™
    • NPI Registry Lookup
    • RVU Search
  • Pharma
  • AI Roundup
  • The Scan
  • Classics™
    • 2MM+ Online Access
    • Paperback and Ebook
  • Rewinds
  • Partners
    • License Content
    • Submit Press Release
    • Advertise with Us
  • Account
    • Subscribe
    • My account
    • Cart
    • Sign-in
No Result
View All Result

© 2026 2 Minute Medicine, Inc. - Physician-written medical news.

2MM+ All Access Full details →

The medical literature, distilled daily.

Monthly plan selected: $4.99 /month.

$4.99/month

5-day free trial · cancel anytime

Start 5-day free trial

Then $4.99/month. Manage renewal in your account.

Yearly plan selected: $49.90 /year.

$49.90/year

2 months free · only $4.16/month

Start 5-day free trial

Then $49.90/year. Manage renewal in your account.

Membership benefits

  • ✓100+ physician-written reports
  • ✓AI EvidencePulse™ + HypeCheck™
  • ✓Ad-free reading + newsletters

Already a member? Sign in