ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2026
A modified Canadian Syncope Risk Score for emergency department use.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2026. 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.
- Management of Syncope in Geriatric Patients: Are 2018 European Society of Cardiology Guidelines Still Relevant?Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Syncope is a frequent presentation in the emergency department (ED) and carries a heterogeneous risk of adverse outcomes, making early stratification challenging. The Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) is among the most validated prognostic tools; however, its inclusion of the "ED diagnosis" variable may hinder real-time applicability. We aimed to evaluate a modified version of the CSRS, excluding this variable (CSRS-ED), in predicting 30-day serious outcomes. We conducted a retrospective, single-center study including 935 consecutive patients presenting with syncope to the ED of Santa Croce e Carle Hospital (Cuneo, Italy) between January 2021 and December 2024. The primary endpoint was a composite of arrhythmic and non-arrhythmic serious conditions and all-cause mortality within 30 days, in accordance with prior CSRS derivation and validation studies. CSRS-ED performance was assessed through discrimination, calibration, and diagnostic accuracy at predefined score thresholds to determine sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. Comparisons were made with SFSR, EGSYS and OESIL scores. Overall, 127 patients (13.6%) experienced adverse outcomes, with 1.3% 30-day mortality. The CSRS-ED showed excellent discrimination (AUROC 0.87, 95% CI 0.84-0.90). At a threshold of ≥ 0, sensitivity was 0.97 with a negative predictive value of 0.99 and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.06. Calibration analysis revealed no significant miscalibration. In conclusion, the CSRS-ED maintains strong prognostic accuracy without requiring an adjudicated ED diagnosis, supporting its potential as a practical tool for early risk stratification and safe discharge decisions in ED patients presenting with syncope.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41665779What 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.