ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2018
Building an Adult Congenital Heart Program: Critical Components and Important Allies.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2018. 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.
- Clinical Presentation, Management and Outcome of adult congenital heart disease at tertiary care hospital in Pakistan.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Neurocognitive and Psychological Interventions for Adults With Congenital Heart Disease: A Consensus Statement From the Adult Congenital Heart Disease/Neuro 2024 Conference.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Understanding gaps in guideline-recommended adult congenital heart disease care: Data from 12 US health care centers.American heart journal · 2026Article
- Impact of Social Determinants of Health on Outcomes for Patients with Adult Congenital Heart Disease.Current cardiology reports · 2024Review
- Mental health diagnoses in hospitalized adults with congenital heart disease in the state of Texas: A 10-year review.International journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease · 2022Article
- [[Clinical and surgical profile of adults with congenital heart disease undergoing cardiac surgery at a Peruvian referral center]].Archivos peruanos de cardiologia y cirugia cardiovascularArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of the reviewThe purpose of this review is to illustrate specific challenges and opportunities in the building of an adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) program and to highlight critical components and important allies. RECENT
findingsWith more than 1.4 million adults with congenital heart disease in the USA alone, access to specialized, compassionate, high-quality comprehensive care requires a shift toward more aggressive expansion of ACHD care, especially in the context of sparse ACHD provider representation in the vast majority of adult medical centers. The effective build of an ACHD program requires measured escalation in management of ACHD complexity matched with cultivation of key resources and clinical services ranging from congenital cardiac surgery and interventional cardiology to acquired heart disease as well as partnerships with non-cardiac specialists. By reframing ACHD care as a shared goal between patients, providers, hospitals, pharmaceutical and device industry, and payers, a potent business model can be built around the developing ACHD program to facilitate acquisition of these key resources.
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.