ArticleOpen heart2020
Exploring the acceptability of implantable defibrillators in patients with cardiac dystrophinopathy and carers.
Article in Open heart, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adult North Star Network (ANSN): Consensus Guideline For The Standard Of Care Of Adults With Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.Journal of neuromuscular diseases · 2021Guideline
- Cardiac MRI in cardiac dystrophinopathy: recommendations on imaging.Open heart · 2026Review
- Cardiomyopathy in Non-Ambulatory Patients with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: Two Case Reports with Varying Outcomes, Considering Novel Treatments.Reports (MDPI) · 2024Article
- Cardiac care of children with dystrophinopathy and females carrying DMD-gene variations.Open heart · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Unlike for patients with other forms of cardiomyopathies, those with severe ventricular dysfunction due to Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) are not offered implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy routinely. This prospective study aimed to determine the views of DMD-patients and their carers about discussing sudden death risk and their acceptance of ICDs. Design and setting: Adults with DMD (n=9) and parents/carers (n=9) participated in audio-recorded, 60-90 min focus group sessions (patients 2; parents/carers 2) conducted through either a face-to-face session at a neutral venue or a videoconference. Sessions were facilitated by a clinical psychologist, experienced in conducting focus group research. All participants understood the rationale for the study and the nature of ICD therapy. The same predefined themes were explored with each group. Recordings were transcribed, analysed thematically by two researchers, working independently and then agreed. Differences in responses between patient and carer groups were also studied and compared. Participants all provided informed written consent and the study had ethical approval. Results: Three main themes emerged: (1) access to/quality of information provided by professionals and patient engagement with them; (2) decision-making about ICDs; (3) individuals' own 'lived experience' of DMD. Conclusions: The main findings were: (1) patients with DMD want to have their risk of sudden arrhythmic death discussed, when relevant and (2) if ICD therapy were established as beneficial, they would welcome an individualised discussion about its appropriateness for them.
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.