The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Diagnostic Performance of Stress Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Coronary Artery Disease
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES The purpose of our study was to conduct an evidence-based evaluation of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). BACKGROUND Stress cardiac MRI has recently emerged as a noninvasive method in the detection of CAD, with 2 main techniques in use: 1) perfusion imaging; and 2) stress-induced wall motion abnormalities imaging. METHODS We examined studies from January 1990 to January 2007 using MEDLINE and EMBASE. A study was included if it: 1) used stress MRI as a diagnostic test for CAD (> or =50% diameter stenosis); and 2) used catheter X-ray angiography as the reference standard. RESULTS Thirty-seven studies (2,191 patients) met the inclusion criteria, with 14 datasets (754 patients) using stress-induced wall motion abnormalities imaging and 24 datasets (1,516 patients) using perfusion imaging. Stress-induced wall motion abnormalities imaging demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79 to 0.88) and specificity of 0.86 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.91) on a patient level (disease prevalence = 70.5%). Perfusion imaging demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.91 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.94) and specificity of 0.81 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.85) on a patient level (disease prevalence = 57.4%). CONCLUSIONS In studies with high disease prevalence, stress cardiac MRI, using either technique, demonstrates overall good sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of CAD. However, limited data are available regarding use of either technique in populations with low disease prevalence.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Whiting, P., Rutjes, A. W., Reitsma, J. B., Bossuyt, P. M., & Kleijnen, J. (2003) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-3-25 · Cited by 3,592
Reitsma, J. B., Glas, A. S., Rutjes, A. W. S., Scholten, R. J. P. M., Bossuyt, P. M., & Zwinderman, A. H. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.02.022 · Cited by 3,369
Cited by
2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease
Task Force Members, Montalescot, G., Sechtem, U., Achenbach, S., Andreotti, F., Arden, C., Budaj, A., Bugiardini, R., Crea, F., Cuisset, T., et al. (2013) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/eht296 · Cited by 4,510
Fihn, S. D., Gardin, J. M., Abrams, J., Berra, K., Blankenship, J. C., Dallas, A. P., Douglas, P. S., Foody, J. M., Gerber, T. C., Hinderliter, A. L., et al. (2012) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e318277d6a0 · Cited by 845
Coronary CT versus MR angiography: the role of MR angiography
Sakuma, H. (2011) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.10100116 · Cited by 73
Metadata
- Authors
- Nandalur, K. R., Dwamena, B. A., Choudhri, A. F., Nandalur, M. R., & Carlos, R. C.
- Venue
- Journal of the American College of Cardiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2007-10
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- 1343-1353
- ISSN
- 0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W10402784
- Cited by
- 555
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 28.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Diagnostic Performance of Stress Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Coronary Artery Disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.06.030
- The paper
- Nandalur, K. R., Dwamena, B. A., Choudhri, A. F., Nandalur, M. R., & Carlos, R. C. (2007). Diagnostic Performance of Stress Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Coronary Artery Disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.06.030
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.