CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 309Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersEmergency and Acute Care StudiesClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prospective Validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule to Predict Patients With Serious Outcomes

Quinn, James, McDermott, Daniel, Stiell, Ian, Kohn, Michael, Wells, George·2006·Annals of Emergency Medicine
DOI 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.11.019
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Study objective We prospectively validate the San Francisco Syncope Rule (history of congestive heart failure, Hematocrit <30%, abnormal ECG result [new changes or non-sinus rhythm], complaint of shortness of breath, and systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg during triage).Methods In a prospective cohort study, consecutive patients with syncope or near syncope presenting to an emergency department (ED) of a teaching hospital were identified and enrolled from July 15, 2002, to August 31, 2004. Patients with trauma, alcohol, or drug-associated loss of consciousness and definite seizures were excluded. Physicians prospectively applied the San Francisco Syncope Rule after their evaluation, and patients were followed up to determine whether they had had a predefined serious outcome within 30 days of their ED visit.Results Seven hundred ninety-one consecutive visits were evaluated for syncope, representing 1.2% of all ED visits. The average age was 61 years, 54% of patients were women, and 59% of patients were admitted. Fifty-three visits (6.7%) resulted in patients having serious outcomes that were undeclared during their ED visit. The rule was 98% sensitive (95% confidence interval [CI] 89% to 100%) and 56% specific (95% CI 52% to 60%) to predict these events. In this cohort, the San Francisco Syncope Rule classified 52% of the patients as high risk, potentially decreasing overall admissions by 7%. If the rule had been applied only to the 453 patients admitted, it might have decreased admissions by 24%.Conclusion The San Francisco Syncope Rule performed with high sensitivity and specificity in this validation cohort and is a valuable tool to help risk stratify patients. It may help with physician decisionmaking and improve the use of hospital admission for syncope.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.11.019

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Gallagher, 1997, Hospitalization for fainting, Ann Emerg Med., 29, 540
  2. Schillinger, 2000, Admission for syncope, Wien Klin Wochenschr, 112, 835
  3. Bartoletti, 2004, After the 2001 European Society of Cardiology guidelines, Minerva Med., 95, 451
  4. Del Greco, 2003, Diagnostic pathway of syncope and analysis of the impact of guidelines in a district general hospital, Ital Heart J., 4, 99

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 309

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Quinn, J., McDermott, D., Stiell, I., Kohn, M., & Wells, G.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
Corresponding author
Quinn, James
ORCID
Venue
Annals of Emergency Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-05
Volume
47
Issue
5
Pages
448-454
ISSN
0196-0644 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.11.019
OpenAlex
W2119384358
Cited by
309
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 23
FWCI
21.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Annals of Emergency Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (7k23ar002137-05)
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (K23 AR002137-050)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Keywords
San Francisco Syncope Rule, syncope, presyncope, risk stratification, emergency department triage, congestive heart failure, hematocrit, electrocardiographic abnormalities, dyspnea, hypotension, hospitalization, diagnostic accuracy
MeSH terms
Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Attitude of Health Personnel, Clinical Protocols, Emergency Medicine, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Sensitivity and Specificity, Syncope, Cohort Studies, Risk Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review