Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33108935›Full record

ArticleInnovations (Philadelphia, Pa.)

The Cost of Innovation and Evidence in Cardiac Surgery.

Joanna Chikwe, Mario Gaudino

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Innovations (Philadelphia, Pa.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Joanna Chikwe22494 Department of Cardiac Surgery, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Mario Gaudino373666 Division of Cardiac Surgery, Weill Cornell, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review summarizes a systematic analysis of 216 randomized trials of cardiovascular interventions performed during 2008-2019, according to the source of trial funding. The systematic analysis showed that on average the results of each trial would change significance if only 5 patients experienced different outcomes. Industry-sponsored trials were more likely to use composite endpoints, noninferiority designs, and twice as likely as nonindustry trials to report results favoring the device arm. Over 80% of industry trials used reporting strategies or "spin" suggesting the device arm was advantageous versus fewer than half of non-industry trials. The review discusses the implications of these findings.

Indexed as

Health Care CostsCardiac Surgical ProceduresCardiovascular DiseasesHumansInventionspercutaneous coronary interventionrandomized clinical trialstranscatheter aortic valve replacementtranscatheter mitral valve repair

Identifiers

PMID33108935

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.