ArticleBMJ open2020
Quality of life measured by EQ-5D at different treatment time points for coronary artery disease: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Reducing waste in collection of quality-of-life data through better reporting: a case study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022Pooled it
- Kinesiophobia in patients with coronary heart disease: a Rodgers' evolutionary concept analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
- Kinesiophobia and self-management behaviour related to physical activity in Chinese patients with coronary heart disease: The mediating role of self-efficacy.Nursing open · 2023Article
- The clinical value and cost-effectiveness of treatments for patients with coronary artery disease.Health economics review · 2022Article
- Application of the EQ-5D in the Middle East: A Systematic Review Focusing on Patients Living in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021Review
- Assessment of utility values and QALYs after primary PCI with DP-Xience and BP-Biomatrix stents.PloS one · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCardiovascular disease is estimated to affect 423 million people globally. It caused 18 million deaths in 2017 and is projected to cost US$1 trillion by 2030 worldwide. Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the most common type of cardiovascular disease; CAD treatments can affect patients' quality of life. Valuations of quality of life or health utilities are important for economic evaluations to ascertain relative health benefit when comparing treatments, and can be expected to change for individuals over time. The purpose of this systematic review is to estimate the quality of life of patients with CAD reported through the EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire, from short to longer term time points following different treatments. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the EuroQol website will be systematically searched from January 2003-March 2020. Published, peer-reviewed, English language studies assessing quality of life of patients with CAD using the EQ-5D will be included. One researcher will conduct the search; two researchers will independently screen titles and abstracts for potential inclusion. Full texts of potentially eligible studies will be retrieved for a second round of independent screening against inclusion and exclusion criteria by two researchers. The final list of included studies will be assessed for risk of bias using the RoB 2 and Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tools for randomised and non-randomised studies, respectively. Data extraction will be done by one researcher, with data extraction for a random 10% of included studies checked by a second researcher. Mean utility weights for individual studies will be combined using random effects model meta-analyses. A model will be run separately for each time point and treatment. Treatment time points of interest include baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12-24 months and more than 24 months. Subgroup analysis of patients with diabetes who received interventional treatments-coronary artery bypass graft or percutaneous coronary intervention with or without stents, will be conducted for the same selected time points. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for systematic reviews. Results of the review will be disseminated via publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
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.