ReviewCurrent heart failure reports2017
Global Variations in Patient Populations and Outcomes in Heart Failure Clinical Trials.
Review in Current heart failure reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of coenzyme Q10 in Europeans with chronic heart failure: A sub-group analysis of the Q-SYMBIO randomized double-blind trial.Cardiology journal · 2019Trial
- Advancing Wider Implementation of Multi-regional Clinical Trials in East Asia.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Review
- Sub-Saharan Africa's Contribution to Clinical Trials in International Acute Coronary Syndromes and Heart Failure Guidelines.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
- Nanoparticle-Mediated Drug Delivery for Treatment of Ischemic Heart Disease.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- Moving From Heart Failure Guidelines to Clinical Practice: Gaps Contributing to Readmissions in Patients With Multiple Comorbidities and Older Age.Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology · 2018Article
- Impact of Site Selection and Study Conduct on Outcomes in Global Clinical Trials.Current heart failure reports · 2017Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewHeart failure is a global pandemic and there has been a growing effort to enroll patients from different geographical regions in randomized controlled trials. In this review, we examined regional variation in both patient characteristics and outcomes among several of the most recent global heart failure trials RECENT
findingsRetrospective analyses of global heart failure trials have identified marked variations in both baseline characteristics and management of heart failure by region of enrollment. In some trials, this variation has been significant enough to cause differential treatment effects. We summarized key heterogeneity observed in global heart failure clinical trials. Differences in both patient population and organization of these trials abroad pose an important challenge in making interpretations and country-level decisions. As such, we encourage a concerted effort to account for these differences in future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28185163What 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.