Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30891675›Full record

ReviewCurrent heart failure reports2019

Have Traditional Heart Failure Management Programs Reached Their "Use by" Date? Time to Apply More Nuanced Care.

Simon Stewart

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current heart failure reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Simon StewartHatter Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, 8001, South Africa. simon.stewart@uct.ac.za.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewTo determine the current evidence supporting the otherwise proven heart failure management programs (HFMPs) in the setting of an increasingly older and more complex patient population. RECENT

findingsAttempts to replace proven face-to-face, multidisciplinary management of HF with remote management techniques (including telemedicine and implantable remote monitoring devices) have yielded mixed results. This may well reflect the clinical cascade effect of greater surveillance paradoxically leading to worse health outcomes as well as a narrow focus on HF alone in patients with clinically significant multimorbidity. Concurrently, there is preliminary evidence that the increasing phenomenon of HF and multimorbidity in older patients is undermining the otherwise positive impact of "traditional" HFMPs. A more nuanced approach to determining who would benefit from what form of HF management, including the integration of remote surveillance techniques, is required.

Indexed as

Case ManagementDelivery of Health CareEvidence-Based MedicineHealth Care CostsHeart FailureHospitalizationHumansTelemedicineTelemetryDisease managementHealth outcomesHeart failureMorbidityMortalityMultidisciplinaryNurse-led intervention

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.