ArticleThe journal of nursing research : JNR2025
Association Between Angina Symptom Characteristics and Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: A Comparative Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in The journal of nursing research : JNR, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAngina, the primary symptom reported by patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), is an essential consideration in CAD treatment strategies and evaluations of treatment efficacy. However, research exploring the relationship between angina symptom characteristics (severity, type, and frequency) and obstructive CAD is scarce. PURPOSE: This study was designed to investigate the association between obstructive CAD and angina symptom severity, type, and frequency.
methodsA cross-sectional approach was used to analyze baseline data from two studies conducted from March 2018 to September 2021 at a medical center in northern Taiwan. The sample comprised 723 patients undergoing invasive coronary angiography for suspected or known CAD. The participants were categorized into obstructive (≥50% stenosis in at least one epicardial artery) and control groups. Angina symptom severity, type, and frequency were assessed using the Angina Evaluation Form.
resultsThe average age of the participants was 60.1 years, and most (83.7%) were male. Nearly three-quarters (73.1%) had Class 1 or 2 angina, 60.3% reported experiencing typical angina, and 46% had angina episodes at least once per week. The results of multiple logistic regression analysis found older age, male sex, history of diabetes, currently smoking, higher low-density lipoprotein levels, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, and typical angina to be associated with a higher risk of obstructive CAD. Risk of obstructive CAD was twice as high in participants experiencing typical angina symptoms than those experiencing atypical angina symptoms ( OR =1.97, 95% CI=[1.09, 3.54], p =.025). Subgroup analysis findings identified associations to be higher in younger ( OR =2.22, 95% CI=[1.23, 3.99], p =.008) and male ( OR =1.83, 95% CI=[1.08, 3.09], p =.024) participants. Also, the risk of obstructive CAD was higher for those experiencing angina episodes less than twice per week, only in the subgroup of older individuals. No significant relationship between angina symptom severity and risk of obstructive CAD was found. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Angina type, rather than severity or frequency, is significantly associated with obstructive CAD. The findings of this study emphasize the importance of conducting comprehensive angina symptom evaluation in risk assessments on patients with suspected or known CAD. Furthermore, large-scale prospective studies should be conducted in different population groups and settings to validate angina symptoms as a predictor of obstructive CAD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.