Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 280

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Chest pain in women: clinical, investigative, and prognostic features

Open access
Sullivan, A K, Holdright, D R, Wright, C A, Sparrow, J L, Cunningham, D, Fox, K M·1994·BMJ

Abstract

Objective : To characterise clinical, investigative, and prognostic features of women referred with chest pain who subsequently underwent coronary angiography. Design : Analysis of all women with angina referred to one consultant during 1987-91 who subsequently underwent coronary angiography, with follow up to present day. Setting : Cardiothoracic centre Subjects : Women with normal coronary arteries; women with coronary artery disease shown on angiography; men with coronary artery disease matched for age; men referred with chest pain during the same period subsequently found to have normal coronary arteries. Main outcome measures : Risk factor analysis; results of exercise testing and coronary angiography; intervention; morbidity and mortality. Results : Women comprised 23% (202/886) of patients referred with chest pain who subsequently underwent angiography. 83/202 women had normal coronary angiograms compared with 55/684 men (41% v 8%, P<0.001). Diabetes mellitus was the only risk factor more frequently encountered in women with coronary artery disease (P=0.001). The specificity and positive predictive value of exercise testing before angiography were significantly lower in women than men (71% v 93%, P<0.001 and 76% v 95%, P<0.001, respectively). Revascularisation procedures were as common in women with coronary artery disease as in men (81 (68%) v 70 (59%)), and there was no difference in event rate during follow up. Many patients with normal coronary arteries, irrespective of sex, had symptoms during follow up (61 (73%) women, 36 (65%) men) and continued to take antianginal drugs (27 (33%) women, 14 (28%) men); 14 (17%) women and six (11%) men required hospital readmission for severe symptoms. Conclusions : In this series, although women comprised the minority of patients referred with chest pain, a diagnosis of normal coronary arteries was five times more common in women than men. Risk factor analysis and exercise testing were of limited value in predicting coronary artery disease in women. There was no sex bias regarding revascularisation procedures, and outcome was similar. A diagnosis of non-cardiac chest pain in patients with normal coronary arteries was of little benefit to the patient with regard to morbidity.

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 · 10.1136/bmj.308.6933.883

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 280

Metadata

Authors
Sullivan, A. K., Holdright, D. R., Wright, C. A., Sparrow, J. L., Cunningham, D., & Fox, K. M.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1994-04-02
Volume
308
Issue
6933
Pages
883-886
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2029867907
Cited by
280
References
2
FWCI
6.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Chest pain in women: clinical, investigative, and prognostic features. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.308.6933.883
The paper
Sullivan, A. K., Holdright, D. R., Wright, C. A., Sparrow, J. L., Cunningham, D., & Fox, K. M. (1994). Chest pain in women: clinical, investigative, and prognostic features. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.308.6933.883

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.