ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2019
Public reporting on cardiac electrophysiology procedures and outcomes: where are we now and where are we headed?
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Challenging the status quo: a scoping review of value-based care models in cardiology and electrophysiology.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the years, public reporting of patient outcomes has been promoted as a means to improve healthcare quality. More recently, in response to dramatic rises in healthcare costs, the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) of 2015 was implemented in an effort to link quality with reimbursement. As part of a value-based model, public reporting of procedural outcomes has been incorporated into this initiative. Outcomes measures that have been introduced in cardiology include heart failure readmission and post-myocardial infarction medication prescription. Public reporting of these data has led not only to positive changes but also to unintended negative consequences. The limited number of existing registries and lack of clear consensus on quality metrics have posed challenges for quality and value assessment in cardiac electrophysiology. After learning from the lessons of existing models of public reporting, physicians, professional societies, stakeholders, and patients will need to collaborate to develop a health care model that can improve outcomes and reduce waste.
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.