ReviewClinical cardiology2022
Improving implementation of evidence-based therapies for heart failure.
Review in Clinical cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancement of the implementation of evidence-based therapies for cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic conditions: A multi-stakeholder perspective.American heart journal · 2025Review
- Early prescription of quadruple therapy in acute decompensated heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A propensity score-matched analysis.ESC heart failure · 2025Observational
- Impact of optimal medical therapy in heart failure certification for hospitalists on guideline-directed medical therapy utilization.World journal of cardiology · 2025Article
- Characterization of 2,500 Patients with Heart Failure and Analysis of Their Optimal Medical Therapy: Insights from the AMERICCAASS Registry.Global heart · 2025Observational
- Outcomes of cerebrovascular disease in muscular dystrophies: A propensity-matched nationwide analysis.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Implementation Science to Achieve Equity in Heart Failure Care: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation · 2024Review
- Patient Perspectives on Digital Interventions to Manage Heart Failure Medications: The VITAL-HF Pilot.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Improving implementation of evidence-based therapies for heart failure.Clinical cardiology · 2022Review
- Advances in the management of heart failure.Clinical cardiology · 2022Article
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
Treatment options for patients with heart failure have improved rapidly over the last few decades. Data from large scale clinical trials demonstrate that medical and device therapies can improve quality of life, reduce hospitalizations for acute heart failure, and reduce mortality. However, the use of many of these therapies in routine practice is remarkably low. There are many reasons for suboptimal implementation of evidence-based therapies for heart failure, and we believe addressing the large gap between what can be accomplished in clinical trials versus routine practice is a critical and urgent public health issue. In this review, we outline reasons for this implementation gap and review recent studies attempting to address this issue. We also provide recommendations for future interventions and areas of clinical investigation to improve implementation for patients with heart failure.
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.