Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32198590›Full record

ReviewPediatric cardiology2020

Decision-Making in the Catheter Laboratory: The Most Important Variable in Successful Outcomes.

Sophie Duignan, Kevin P Walsh, Colin J McMahon

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Prevention and Management of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention-Related Complications: Assessing the Impact of Simulation-Based Learning and Human Factors Training.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sophie DuignanDepartment of Paediatric Cardiology, Children's Hospital Ireland, Crumlin, Dublin 12, Ireland.
Kevin P WalshDepartment of Paediatric Cardiology, Children's Hospital Ireland, Crumlin, Dublin 12, Ireland.
Colin J McMahonDepartment of Paediatric Cardiology, Children's Hospital Ireland, Crumlin, Dublin 12, Ireland. cmcmahon992004@yahoo.com.
Children's Health Ireland at Crumlin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increasingly the importance of how and why we make decisions in the medical arena has been questioned. Traditionally the aeronautical and business worlds have shed a light on this complex area of human decision-making. In this review we reflect on what we already know about the complexity of decision-making in addition to directing particular focus on the challenges to decision-making in the high-intensity environment of the pediatric cardiac catheterization laboratory. We propose that the most critical factor in outcomes for children in the catheterization lab may not be technical failures but rather human factors and the lack of preparation and robust shared decision-making process between the catheterization team. Key technical factors involved in the decision-making process include understanding the anatomy, the indications and objective to be achieved, equipment availability, procedural flow, having a back-up plan and post-procedural care plan. Increased awareness, pre-catheterization planning, use of standardized clinical assessment and management plans and artificial intelligence may provide solutions to pitfalls in decision-making. Further research and efforts should be directed towards studying the impact of human factors in the cardiac catheterization laboratory as well as the broader medical environment.

Indexed as

Decision MakingArtificial IntelligenceCardiac CatheterizationChildHumansCardiacCatheterizationDecision-makingHuman factors

Identifiers

PMID32198590
OpenAlexW3012666150

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.