ReviewJAMA cardiology2018
Public Reporting of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes: Moving Beyond the Status Quo.
Review in JAMA cardiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bridging the gaps in interventional cardiology disparities-socioeconomic, geographic, and political inequalities.European heart journal open · 2025Review
- Article
- Variation in Likelihood of Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Among US Hospitals.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Contemporary Risk Models for In-Hospital and 30-Day Mortality After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.Current cardiology reports · 2024Review
- Institutional Variance in Mortality after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Myocardial Infarction in Korea, Japan, and Taiwan.International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- Association Between Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Appropriateness and Publicly Reported Outcomes.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2021Article
- Performance of Hospitals When Assessing Disease-Based Mortality Compared With Procedural Mortality for Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction.JAMA cardiology · 2020Article
- Public reporting of PCI operator outcomes.Aging · 2019Article
- Association Between Current and Future Annual Hospital Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Mortality Rates.JAMA cardiology · 2019Article
- Key components of a community response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2019Review
- Public Reporting of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes: Institutional Costs and Physician Burden.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2019Article
- Inadequate Surrogates for Imperfect Quality Measures.Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions · 2018Article
- Influence of Major Adverse Events on Procedural Selection for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking Program.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & InterventionsArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: More than 20 years have passed since public reporting of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) outcomes first began in New York State, but reporting remains a polarizing issue. Observations: Advocates of public reporting point to the strong incentive that public disclosure of outcomes data provides for institutions and clinicians to improve clinical care and to the importance of enabling patients to make informed choices about their care. Critics highlight the methodological challenges that impede fair and accurate assessments of care quality as well as reporting's unintended consequences. Public reporting of PCI outcomes has only been implemented in 5 states, but reporting efforts for multiple conditions and procedures are now proliferating nationally, propelled by the notion that transparency improves the quality of health care and fosters trust in health care institutions. Careful evaluation of the evidence to date for PCI in particular, however, suggests that enthusiasm for such efforts should be tempered. Conclusions and Relevance: Public reporting has not achieved its primary objectives. Policy makers should consider variations of reporting that might strengthen care quality, empower patients, and mitigate undesirable repercussions.
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.