ReviewCurrent heart failure reports2017
Registry-Based Pragmatic Trials in Heart Failure: Current Experience and Future Directions.
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 43 papers, 3 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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Data standards for heart failure: the European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomized Trials (EuroHeart).European heart journal · 2022Pooled it
- Endovascular versus conventional open surgical repair for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Association is not causation: treatment effects cannot be estimated from observational data in heart failure.European heart journal · 2018Pooled it
- Article
- Clinical endpoints in pragmatic heart failure trials: From data collection to clinical endpoint classification.ESC heart failure · 2025Review
- A multicentre registry of hospitalized patients with acute and chronic heart failure: Study design of the HESC heart failure · 2025Observational
- The Spironolactone Initiation Registry Randomized Interventional Trial in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (SPIRRIT-HFpEF): Rationale and design.European journal of heart failure · 2024Article
- Use cases of registry-based randomized controlled trials-A review of the registries' contributions and constraints.Clinical and translational science · 2024Review
- Benchmarking reverse docking through AlphaFold2 human proteome.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2024Article
- Article
- Novel Trial Designs in Heart Failure: Using Digital Health Tools to Increase Pragmatism.Current heart failure reports · 2024Review
- The role of early-phase trials and real-world evidence in drug development.Nature cardiovascular research · 2024Review
- The Therapy and Management of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: New Insights on Treatment.Cardiac failure review · 2024Review
- Optimizing clinical nutrition research: the role of adaptive and pragmatic trials.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2023Review
- Temporal trends in evidence supporting therapeutic interventions in heart failure and other European Society of Cardiology guidelines.ESC heart failure · 2023Article
- GENERATOR HEART FAILURE DataMart: An integrated framework for heart failure research.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Real-world comparative effectiveness of ARNI versus ACEi/ARB in HF with reduced or mildly reduced ejection fraction.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2023Article
- Outcomes and predictors of one-year mortality in patients hospitalized with Acute Heart Failure.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2022Article
- Generalizability of randomized controlled trials in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2022Article
- Registry-based randomised clinical trials: a remedy for evidence-based diabetes care?Diabetologia · 2022Review
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
purpose of reviewRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) in heart failure (HF) are becoming increasingly complex and expensive to conduct and if positive deliver expensive therapy tested only in selected populations. RECENT
findingsElectronic health records and clinical cardiovascular quality registries are providing opportunities for pragmatic and registry-based prospective randomized clinical trials (RRCTs). Simplified regulatory, ethics, and consent procedures; recruitment integrated into real-world care; and simplified or automated baseline and outcome collection allow assessment of study power and feasibility, fast and efficient recruitment, delivery of generalizable findings at low cost, and potentially evidence-based and novel use of generic drugs with low costs to society. There have been no RRCTs in HF to date. Major challenges include generating funding, international collaboration, and the monitoring of safety and adherence for chronic HF treatments. Here, we use the Spironolactone Initiation Registry Randomized Interventional Trial in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (SPIRRIT-HFpEF), to be conducted in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry, to exemplify the advantages and challenges of HF RRCTs.
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.