ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2014
Public reporting of PCI outcomes: for better or for worse.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
- Public reporting on cardiac electrophysiology procedures and outcomes: where are we now and where are we headed?Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2019Article
- A Survey of Interventional Cardiologists' Attitudes and Beliefs About Public Reporting of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.JAMA cardiology · 2018Article
- 2016 Revision of the SCAI position statement on public reporting.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2017Article
- The National Cardiovascular Data Registry Voluntary Public Reporting Program: An Interim Report From the NCDR Public Reporting Advisory Group.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Public reporting of PCI outcomes has had a polarizing effect on the cardiology community. The potential benefits of public reporting are many, but a host of unintended consequences have likely mitigated the anticipated positive impact of current reporting systems. In this review, we discuss what the goals of public disclosure are, the limitations of current reporting systems and the resultant unintended consequences. We also offer a perspective on future directions with a view to ensuring the benefits of public reporting while minimizing the risk of unintended consequences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24893937What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.