Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 434

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevalence and Determinants of Troponin T Elevation in the General Population

Open access
Wallace, Thomas W., Abdullah, Shuaib M., Drazner, Mark H., Das, Sandeep R., Khera, Amit, McGuire, Darren K., Wians, Frank, Sabatine, Marc S., Morrow, David A., de Lemos, James A.·2006·Circulation

Abstract

Background— The prevalence and determinants of cardiac troponin T (cTnT) elevation in the general population are unknown, and the significance of minimally increased cTnT remains controversial. Our objective was to determine the prevalence and determinants of cTnT elevation in a large, representative sample of the general population. Methods and Results— cTnT was measured from stored plasma samples in 3557 subjects of the Dallas Heart Study, a population-based sample. cTnT elevation (≥0.01 μg/L) was correlated with clinical variables and cardiac MRI findings. The sample weight-adjusted prevalence of cTnT elevation in the general population was 0.7%. In univariable analyses, cTnT elevation was associated with older age, black race, male sex, coronary artery calcium by electron beam CT, a composite marker of congestive heart failure (CHF), left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), diabetes mellitus (DM), and chronic kidney disease (CKD) ( P <0.001 for each). Subjects with minimally increased (0.01 to 0.029 μg/L) and increased (≥0.03 μg/L) cTnT had a similar prevalence of these characteristics. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, LVH, CHF, DM, and CKD were independently associated with cTnT elevation. Conclusions— In the general population, cTnT elevation is rare in subjects without CHF, LVH, CKD, or DM, suggesting that the upper limit of normal for the immunoassay should be <0.01 μg/L. Even minimally increased cTnT may represent subclinical cardiac injury and have important clinical implications, a hypothesis that should be tested in longitudinal outcome studies.

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 · 10.1161/circulationaha.105.609974

Cites

36 of 36 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 36 references

Cited by

See all 434

Metadata

Authors
Wallace, T. W., Abdullah, S. M., Drazner, M. H., Das, S. R., Khera, A., McGuire, D. K., Wians, F., Sabatine, M. S., Morrow, D. A., & de Lemos, J. A.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2006-04-25
Volume
113
Issue
16
Pages
1958-1965
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2131110345
Cited by
434
References
36
FWCI
19.47
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: Prevalence and Determinants of Troponin T Elevation in the General Population. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.105.609974
The paper
Wallace, T. W., Abdullah, S. M., Drazner, M. H., Das, S. R., Khera, A., McGuire, D. K., Wians, F., Sabatine, M. S., Morrow, D. A., & de Lemos, J. A. (2006). Prevalence and Determinants of Troponin T Elevation in the General Population. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.105.609974

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.