National variations in the provision of cardiac services in the United Kingdom: second report of the British Cardiac Society Working Group, 2005.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Artificial Intelligence in Echocardiography: The Time is Now.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022
   Review
2. Management of patients with implanted cardiac devices during radiotherapy: results of a Spanish survey in radiation oncology departments.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2018
   Article
3. The cardiac sonography workforce in New Zealand.Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine · 2013
   Article
4. Echocardiography: frontier imaging in cardiology.The British journal of radiology · 2011
   Review

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as