The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fuzzy Cluster Analysis: A New Method to Predict Future Cardiac Events in Patients With Positive Stress Tests
Open accessAbstract
Several studies have shown that combining the change in the ST-segment with another exercise variable improves the predictive value of stress testing. However, no method has been able to combine many stress test variables with the ST-segment change simultaneously and help the clinician better predict future cardiac events. Fuzzy Cluster Analysis (FCA) was used to combine 5 stress test variables with ST-segment deviation to classify each of 232 positive outpatient stress tests as mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal. Cardiac events were recorded in these 3 patient groups up to 96 months (mean 65 months) after the stress tests. Coronary angiography was performed on 159 of these patients within 1 month of their stress tests. FCA better separated the 3 event-free survival curves than classifying the stress tests by three ST-segment (0.5-1.5 mm, 2-2.5 mm, > 3 mm) groups (p < 0.05). At 2 years, 90% of the FCA mild group were compared with 70% for the 0.5-1.5 mm group (p < 0.01). Moderate and severe tests by FCA separated patients with an intermediate from those with a poor prognosis while the 2-2.5 mm and 3 mm or more ST-segment curves did not (p < 0.05). FCA showed overall better correlation with coronary score (r = 0.71) than did the graded ST-segment groups (r = 0.48). FCA predicted both mild and high-grade (triple-vessel and left main) coronary disease better than ST-segment alone. Thus FCA better predicts future cardiac events in patients with positive stress tests than the ST-segment alone. This combined with its usefulness in predicting the extent of coronary disease provides the basis of a clinical strategy for managing patients with positive stress tests.
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
Ellestad, M. H., & Wan, M. K. (1975) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.51.2.363 · Cited by 459
Cited by
Image denoising by sparse 3-D transform-domain collaborative filtering
Dabov, K., Foi, A., Katkovnik, V., & Egiazarian, K. (2007) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2007.901238 · Cited by 9,283
Is There a Need for Fuzzy Logic?
Zadeh, L. A. (2008) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2008.02.012 · Cited by 1,352
Series in Machine Perception and Artificial Intelligence
(2012) · Series in machine perception and artificial intelligence · doi:10.1142/smpai · Cited by 365
A survey of Clustering Algorithms
Rokach, L. (2009) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery Handbook · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-09823-4_14 · Cited by 245
Ben-Israel, A., & Iyigun, C. (2008) · Journal of Classification · doi:10.1007/s00357-008-9002-z · Cited by 74
Metadata
- Authors
- Peters, R. M., Shanies, S. A., & Peters, J. C.
- Venue
- Japanese Circulation Journal
- Publisher
- Japanese Circulation Society
- Published
- 1998
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 750-754
- ISSN
- 0047-1828 (ISSN-L)
- 1347-4839
- OpenAlex
- W1941358455
- Cited by
- 811
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.09
- 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: Fuzzy Cluster Analysis: A New Method to Predict Future Cardiac Events in Patients With Positive Stress Tests. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1253/jcj.62.750
- The paper
- Peters, R. M., Shanies, S. A., & Peters, J. C. (1998). Fuzzy Cluster Analysis: A New Method to Predict Future Cardiac Events in Patients With Positive Stress Tests. Japanese Circulation Journal. https://doi.org/10.1253/jcj.62.750
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.