ArticleCJC open2020
Age, Sex, and Remote Monitoring Differences in Device Acceptance for Patients With Implanted Cardioverter Defibrillators in Canada.
Article in CJC open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Device-related events do not alter long-term psychological distress after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation: A 24-month prospective cohort study.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Do gender differences persist in ICD implantation in patients with acute on chronic heart failure?Future cardiology · 2025Article
- Validity and Reliability of the Korean Version of the Florida Patient Acceptance Survey.Nursing open · 2025Article
- Predictors of Quality of Life, Anxiety and Acceptance in Patients with Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Multidisciplinary Electrophysiology-Psychology Ventricular Arrhythmia Clinic.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2022Article
- Changes in quality of life, depression, general anxiety, and heart-focused anxiety after defibrillator implantation.ESC heart failure · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImplantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) acceptance and shock anxiety are issues that clinicians should address to improve quality of life among device recipients. Previous findings have indicated that younger patients experience poorer device adjustment. The purpose of this study was to examine age and ICD-specific quality-of-life outcomes in a large sample of Canadian ICD patients. We tested the hypothesis that patient age is related to device acceptance and shock anxiety in an Alberta (Canada) ICD population.
methodsThe Florida Patient Acceptance Survey (FPAS) and Florida Shock Acceptance Survey (FSAS) were completed by ICD patients attending the Cardiac Implantable Electrical Device Clinics in Alberta. The population was dichotomized into those aged ≤ 65 years (younger) and those aged > 65 years (older). Sex, ICD shock history, and remote monitoring use were also examined.
resultsSurveys were completed by 126 younger (53 ± 11 years; 79% male) and 216 older (74 ± 6 years; 85% male) patients. Younger, compared with older, patients had greater device-related distress (
conclusionsICD patients aged ≤ 65 years reported poorer device acceptance and greater shock anxiety than older patients. Younger patients may require targeted interventions addressing adjustment to the ICD, and impact of the ICD on body image. Moreover, education about the relatively low probability of shocks may alleviate shock anxiety in younger patients.
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.