ArticleOpen heart2020
Needs analysis of parents following sudden cardiac death in the young.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- 2020 APHRS/HRS expert consensus statement on the investigation of decedents with sudden unexplained death and patients with sudden cardiac arrest, and of their families.Heart rhythm · 2021Guideline
- Needs and experiences of families after a sudden unexplained death in childhood: a qualitative study.BMJ paediatrics open · 2025Article
- 2020 APHRS/HRS expert consensus statement on the investigation of decedents with sudden unexplained death and patients with sudden cardiac arrest, and of their families.Journal of arrhythmia · 2021Article
- A qualitative analysis of psychosocial needs and support impacts in families affected by young sudden cardiac death: The role of community and peer support.European journal of cardiovascular nursing · 2020Article
- Shock to the Heart: Psychosocial Implications and Applications of Sudden Cardiac Death in the Young.Current cardiology reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe sudden cardiac death (SCD) of a young person is a devastating event for any parent. Inherited heart disease is often either identified or assumed to be the cause. Few studies have explored the psychosocial impact to the surviving at-risk family members. We sought to investigate the needs of parents who have experienced the SCD of their child (≤45 years).
methodsA quantitative needs analysis questionnaire was developed based on semistructured interviews, including one focus group and a review of relevant literature. Eligible participants were invited to participate in this cross-sectional survey study.
resultsThere were 38 parents who completed a quantitative survey. Parents' perceived needs for information and support spanned medical, psychosocial, spiritual and financial domains. Of the support and information needs assessed, medical needs were identified as the most important domain, followed by psychosocial, spiritual and financial. Importantly, psychosocial information and support needs were reported as the most unmet need, endorsed by 54% of parents. Medical information and support needs were reported as unmet by almost one third of parents. The two most endorsed needs were 'To have the option of whether or not you would pursue genetic testing for yourself or family members' and 'To understand what happened'.
conclusionsThis work demonstrates for the first time, the multifactorial needs of parents after SCD in the young. With the greatest unmet need reported as psychosocial needs, there is clear necessity to find ways of integrating psychological support in to the care of families after SCD in the young.
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.