ArticleClinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology2020
Awareness, Knowledge, and Utility of RCT Data vs RWE: Results From a Survey of US Cardiologists: Real-world Evidence in Clinical Decision Making.
Article in Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Association between dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor use and diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of real-world studies.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative analysis of randomized versus real-world populations in heart failure: DIAMOND trial vs CARE-HK registry.ESC heart failure · 2026Trial
- The Utility of Cerebral Protection Devices in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Meta-analysis.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Review
- Acceptance and Utilization of Real-World Evidence among Cancer Care Physicians in the USA: A National Survey.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2025Article
- A cohort description and comparison of four European national diabetes registries for the REDDIE project.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2025Article
- Article
- Real World Data Studies of Antineoplastic Drugs: How Can They Be Improved to Steer Everyday Use in the Clinic?Pragmatic and observational research · 2023Review
- Global real-world data on hemodiafiltration: An opportunity to complement clinical trial evidence.Seminars in dialysis · 2022Review
- How do cancer clinicians perceive real-world data and the evidence derived therefrom? Findings from an international survey of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Real-world evidence enhances decision making.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Real-world evidence (RWE) provides a potential rich source of additional information to the body of data available from randomized clinical trials (RCTs), but there is a need to understand the strengths and limitations of RWE before it can be applied to clinical practice. To gain insight into current thinking in clinical decision making and utility of different data sources, a representative sampling of US cardiologists selected from the current, active Fellows of the American College of Cardiology (ACC) were surveyed to evaluate their perceptions of findings from RCTs and RWE studies and their application in clinical practice. The survey was conducted online via the ACC web portal between 12 July and 11 August 2017. Of the 548 active ACC Fellows invited as panel members, 173 completed the survey (32% response), most of whom were board certified in general cardiology (n = 119, 69%) or interventional cardiology (n = 40, 23%). The survey results indicated a wide range of familiarity with and utilization of RWE amongst cardiologists. Most cardiologists were familiar with RWE and considered RWE in clinical practice at least some of the time. However, a significant minority of survey respondents had rarely or never applied RWE learnings in their clinical practice, and many did not feel confident in the results of RWE other than registry data. These survey findings suggest that additional education on how to assess and interpret RWE could help physicians to integrate data and learnings from RCTs and RWE to best guide clinical decision making.
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.