You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Correspondence
GRACE risk recommendations in NICE CG94 are not appropriate
  1. Elved Roberts1,
  2. Mamas Mamas2,3,
  3. Alice Wood1,
  4. Douglas Fraser2,
  5. Rod Stables4,
  6. Erwin Rodrigues5,
  7. Ian Hudson1,
  8. Nick Palmer4,
  9. Doug Skehan1
  1. 1Department of Cardiology, Glenfield Hospital, University Hospitals Leicester, Leicester, UK
  2. 2Manchester Heart Centre, Manchester, UK
  3. 3University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  4. 4Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK
  5. 5Aintree Cardiac Centre, Aintree University Hospitals, Liverpool, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Elved Roberts, Department of Cardiology, Glenfield Hospital, University Hospitals Leicester, Leicester LE39QP, UK; elvedroberts{at}gmail.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300405

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    To the Editor The article by Gray et al is a succinct and useful summary of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) clinical guidance 94 (CG94) on the management of unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction.1 The NICE document is itself a major piece of work that synthesises vast bodies of evidence.2 The majority of the document and the resulting summary to which we respond are …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Linked articles 300406

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles

    • PostScript
      The Authors' reply
      Huon H Gray Robert A Henderson Mark A de Belder S Richard Underwood A John Camm
      Heart 2011; 97 1279-1280 Published Online First: 16 Jun 2011. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300406