The GWC included representatives from the ACC and AHA, American Academy of Family Physicians, American College of Emergency Physicians, American College of Physicians, Society for Table 1. Applying Classification of Recommendations and Level of Evidence A recommendation with Level of Evidence B or C does not imply that the recommendation is weak. Many important clinical questions addressed in the clinical practice guidelines do not lend themselves to clinical trials. Although randomized trials are unavailable, there may be a very clear clinical consensus that a particular test or therapy is useful or effective. *Data available from clinical trials or registries about the usefulness/efficacy in different subpopulations, such as sex, age, history of diabetes mellitus, history of prior myocardial infarction, history of heart failure, and prior aspirin use. For comparative-effectiveness recommendations (Class I and IIa; Level of Evidence A and B only), studies that support the use of comparator verbs should involve direct comparisons of the treatments or strategies being evaluated. Amsterdam et al 2014 AHA/ACC NSTE-ACS Guideline e349 Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), and Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS). 1.3. Document Review and Approval This document was reviewed by 2 official reviewers each nominated by the ACC and AHA; 1 reviewer each from the American Academy of Family Physicians, American College of Emergency Physicians, SCAI, and STS; and 37 individ- ual content reviewers (including members of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry, ACC Heart Failure and Transplant Section Leadership Council, ACC Cardiovascular Imaging Section Leadership Council, ACC Interventional Section Leadership Council,ACC Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Committee, ACC Surgeons Council, Association of International Governors, and Department of Health and Human Services). Reviewers RWI information was distributed to the GWC and is published in this document (Appendix 2). 