Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23110558›Full record

Trial reportBMC cardiovascular disorders2012

The REFER (REFer for EchocaRdiogram) protocol: a prospective validation of a clinical decision rule, NT-proBNP, or their combination, in the diagnosis of heart failure in primary care. Rationale and design.

Lynda Tait, Andrea K Roalfe, Jonathan Mant, Martin R Cowie, Jonathan J Deeks, Rachel Iles, Pelham M Barton, Clare J Taylor, Marites Derit, F D Richard Hobbs

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Primary care REFerral for EchocaRdiogram (REFER) in heart failure: a diagnostic accuracy study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017
    Observational
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Elderly primary care hypertension patients-who to refer for echocardiography?Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2014
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lynda TaitPrimary Care Clinical Sciences, Primary Care Clinical Sciences Building, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
Andrea K Roalfe
Jonathan Mant
Martin R Cowie
Jonathan J Deeks
Rachel Iles
Pelham M Barton
Clare J Taylor
Marites Derit
F D Richard Hobbs
University of Birmingham · GBImperial College London · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Department of Health DRF-2012-05-407Medical Research Council MC_PC_11004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHeart failure is a major cause of mortality and morbidity. As mortality rates are high, it is important that patients seen by general practitioners with symptoms suggestive of heart failure are identified quickly and treated appropriately. Identifying patients with heart failure or deciding which patients need further tests is a challenge. All patients with suspected heart failure should be diagnosed using objective tests such as echocardiography, but it is expensive, often delayed, and limited by the significant skill shortage of trained echocardiographers. Alternative approaches for diagnosing heart failure are currently limited. Clinical decision tools that combine clinical signs, symptoms or patient characteristics are designed to be used to support clinical decision-making and validated according to strict methodological procedures. The REFER Study aims to determine the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of our previously derived novel, simple clinical decision rule, a natriuretic peptide assay, or their combination, in the triage for referral for echocardiography of symptomatic adult patients who present in general practice with symptoms suggestive of heart failure. METHODS/

designThis is a prospective, Phase II observational, diagnostic validation study of a clinical decision rule, natriuretic peptides or their combination, for diagnosing heart failure in primary care. Consecutive adult primary care patients 55 years of age or over presenting to their general practitioner with a chief complaint of recent new onset shortness of breath, lethargy or peripheral ankle oedema of over 48 hours duration, with no obvious recurrent, acute or self-limiting cause will be enrolled. Our reference standard is based upon a three step expert specialist consensus using echocardiography and clinical variables and tests. DISCUSSION: Our clinical decision rule offers a potential solution to the diagnostic challenge of providing a timely and accurate diagnosis of heart failure in primary care. Study results will provide an evidence-base from which to develop heart failure care pathway recommendations and may be useful in standardising care. If demonstrated to be effective, the clinical decision rule will be of interest to researchers, policy makers and general practitioners worldwide.

trial registrationISRCTN17635379.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsPrimary Health CareAgedEchocardiographyElectrocardiographyHeart FailureHumansMiddle AgedNatriuretic Peptide, BrainPeptide FragmentsProspective StudiesResearch DesignNatriuretic Peptide, BrainPeptide Fragmentspro-brain natriuretic peptide (1-76)

Identifiers

PMID23110558
PMCPMC3519731
OpenAlexW1980604105

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.