ReviewCurrent heart failure reports2015
Patient-reported outcomes in heart failure: existing measures and future uses.
Review in Current heart failure reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Temporal Trends and Factors Associated With the Inclusion of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Heart Failure Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Pooled it
- Differences in Health-Related Quality of Life among Patients with Heart Failure.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Feasibility, acceptability, and outcome responsiveness of the SYMPERHEART intervention to support symptom perception in persons with heart failure and their informal caregivers: a feasibility quasi-experimental study.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2023Article
- A multicomponent complex intervention for supportive follow-up of persons with chronic heart failure: a randomized controlled pilot study (the UTILE project).Pilot and feasibility studies · 2023Article
- Considerations in the Interpretation of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Heart Failure With Reduced and Preserved Ejection Fraction.Journal of cardiac failure · 2022Article
- The impact of a targeted education package on the knowledge, attitudes, and utilisation of patient reported outcome measures amongst chiropractors in Australia.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2022Article
- Physician adherence and patient-reported outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in the era of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor therapy.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Psychometric Evaluation of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire in Men and Women With Heart Failure.Circulation. Heart failure · 2021Article
- Development and Initial Validation of the PROMIS®-Plus-HF Profile Measure.Circulation. Heart failure · 2019Article
- CHF-PROM: validation of a patient-reported outcome measure for patients with chronic heart failure.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2018Article
- Interpretability of the European Heart Failure Self-care Behaviour scale.Patient preference and adherence · 2017Article
- Incorporating development of a patient-reported outcome instrument in a clinical drug development program: examples from a heart failure program.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2016Article
- Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension-Symptoms and Impact Questionnaire: feasibility of utilizing one-day versus seven-day symptom reporting.Pulmonary circulationArticle
- Heart Failure in Minority Populations - Impediments to Optimal Treatment in Australian Aborigines.Current cardiology reviewsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are any report obtained directly from a patient about how they feel or function in relation to their health condition and its therapies. Strong support for PROs exists at multiple levels of the health-care community from regulatory boards to clinical researchers. PROs are particularly important in heart failure because it is a common chronic illness marked with acute exacerbations, often requiring hospitalization, and significant symptom burden. Use of PROs to understand patient perspectives will help providers deliver more patient-centered care, and thus improve the quality of care. This review provides a contemporary overview of the current state of PROs in heart failure and suggests future directions and opportunities to advance PRO use to provide more comprehensive care. Advancing PRO measurement along with incorporating longitudinal measures in national databases and local electronic health records will serve to improve patient-centered care for patients with heart failure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.