Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 276

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography According to Pre-Test Probability of Coronary Artery Disease and Severity of Coronary Arterial Calcification

Open access
Arbab-Zadeh, Armin, Miller, Julie M., Rochitte, Carlos E., Dewey, Marc, Niinuma, Hiroyuki, Gottlieb, Ilan, Paul, Narinder, Clouse, Melvin E., Shapiro, Edward P., Hoe, John, Lardo, Albert C., Bush, David E., de Roos, Albert, Cox, Christopher, Brinker, Jeffrey, Lima, Joăo A.C.·2012·Journal of the American College of Cardiology
DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.079
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objectives Assess the impact of patient population characteristics on accuracy by CT angiography (CTA) to detect obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Background The ability of CTA to exclude obstructive CAD in patients of different pretest probabilities and in presence of coronary calcification remains uncertain. Methods For the CorE-64 study 371 patients underwent CTA and cardiac catheterization for the detection of obstructive CAD defined as 50% or greater luminal stenosis by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). This analysis includes 80 initially excluded patients with a calcium score ≥ 600. Area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) was used to evaluate CTA diagnostic accuracy compared to QCA in patients according to calcium score and pretest probability of CAD. Results Analysis of patient-based quantitative CTA accuracy revealed an AUC of 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.95). AUC remained 0.93 (0.90-0.96) after excluding patients with known CAD but decreased to 0.81 (0.71-0.89) in patients with calcium score ≥ 600 (p=0.077). While AUC were similar (0.93, 0.92, and 0.93, respectively) for patients with intermediate, high pretest probability for CAD, and known CAD, negative predictive values were different: 0.90, 0.83, and 0.50, respectively. Negative predictive values decreased from 0.93 to 0.75 for patients with calcium score < or ≥ 100, respectively (p= 0.053). Conclusions Both pretest probability for CAD and coronary calcium scoring should be considered before using CTA for excluding obstructive CAD. CTA is less effective for this purpose in patients with calcium score ≥ 600 and in patients with a high pretest probability for obstructive CAD.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.079

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 13 references

Cited by

See all 276

Metadata

Authors
Arbab-Zadeh, A., Miller, J. M., Rochitte, C. E., Dewey, M., Niinuma, H., Gottlieb, I., Paul, N., Clouse, M. E., Shapiro, E. P., Hoe, J., Lardo, A. C., Bush, D. E., de Roos, A., Cox, C., Brinker, J., & Lima, J. A. C.
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-01
Volume
59
Issue
4
Pages
379-387
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.079
OpenAlex
W1942095528
Cited by
276
References
13
FWCI
21.36
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 Accuracy of Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography According to Pre-Test Probability of Coronary Artery Disease and Severity of Coronary Arterial Calcification. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.079
The paper
Arbab-Zadeh, A., Miller, J. M., Rochitte, C. E., Dewey, M., Niinuma, H., Gottlieb, I., Paul, N., Clouse, M. E., Shapiro, E. P., Hoe, J., Lardo, A. C., Bush, D. E., de Roos, A., Cox, C., Brinker, J., & Lima, J. A. C. (2012). Diagnostic Accuracy of Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography According to Pre-Test Probability of Coronary Artery Disease and Severity of Coronary Arterial Calcification. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.079

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.