SynthesisJournal of the American Heart Association2015
Outcome Reporting in Cardiac Surgery Trials: Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.
Synthesis in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Predictors of health-related quality of life after cardiac surgery: a systematic review.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic review of preoperative physical activity and its impact on postcardiac surgical outcomes.BMJ open · 2017Pooled it
- Pre- and Immediate Postoperative Prediction Model for Organ Dysfunction or Death Early After Cardiac Surgery: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Multicenter Randomized Trial.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Trial
- Facelift Randomized Controlled Trials Compliance With CONSORT Checklist: A Systematic Review.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Review
- Article
- A novel generative multi-task representation learning approach for predicting postoperative complications in cardiac surgery patients.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Development of a core outcome set of quality indicators for enhanced recovery after surgery in minimally invasive cardiac heart valve surgery by interprofessional Delphi consensus.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2024Article
- The Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index Predicts In-Hospital Mortality in Patients Who Underwent On-Pump Cardiac Surgery.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Article
- The association of perioperative serum uric acid variation with in-hospital adverse outcomes in coronary artery bypass grafting patients.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- A novel model for predicting a composite outcome of major complications after valve surgery.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Current Neurologic Assessment and Neuroprotective Strategies in Cardiac Anesthesia: A Survey to the Membership of the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists.Anesthesia and analgesia · 2020Article
- The Predictive Approaches to Treatment effect Heterogeneity (PATH) Statement: Explanation and Elaboration.Annals of internal medicine · 2020Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cardiothoracic Surgery.The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2019Review
- Validation of days at home as an outcome measure after surgery: a prospective cohort study in Australia.BMJ open · 2017Article
- Assessing quality-of-life outcomes in cardiovascular clinical research.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2016Review
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
backgroundThere is currently no accepted standard for reporting outcomes following cardiac surgery. The objective of this paper was to systematically review the literature to evaluate the current use and definition of perioperative outcomes reported in cardiac surgery trials. METHODS AND
resultsWe reviewed 5 prominent medical and surgical journals on Medline from January 1, 2010, to June 30, 2014, for randomized controlled trials involving coronary artery bypass grafting and/or valve surgery. We identified 34 trials meeting inclusion criteria. Sample sizes ranged from 57 to 4752 participants (median 351). Composite end points were used as a primary outcome in 56% (n=19) of the randomized controlled trials and as a secondary outcome in 12% (n=4). There were 14 different composite end points. Mortality at any time (all-cause and/or cardiovascular) was reported as an individual end point or as part of a combined end point in 82% (n=28), myocardial infarction was reported in 68% (n=23), and bleeding was reported in 24% (n=8). Patient-centered outcomes, such as quality of life and functional classification, were reported in 29% (n=10). Definition of clinical events such as myocardial infarction, stroke, renal failure, and bleeding varied considerably among trials, particularly for postoperative myocardial infarction and bleeding, for which 8 different definitions were used for each.
conclusionsOutcome reporting in the cardiac surgery literature is heterogeneous, and efforts should be made to standardize the outcomes reported and the definitions used to ascertain them. The development of standardizing outcome reporting is an essential step toward strengthening the process of evidence-based care in cardiac surgery.
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.