ArticleBMC health services research2022
Quality indicators for acute cardiovascular diseases: a scoping review.
Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quality indicators for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in primary care: A systematic review.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Assessment of Quality of Care Provided for Patients Receiving Post-Myocardial Infarction Care at Selected Cardiac Clinics in Sulaymaniyah: Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Optimizing care and quality indicators in the management of patients with acute ischaemic heart disease and atherothrombotic stroke: measuring to improve.Drugs in context · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of Quality Indicators for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Management in Japan: A Modified Delphi Consensus Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Benchmarking System Monitoring on Quality Improvement in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Nationwide Registry in Japan.JACC. Asia · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough many quality indicator (QI) sets have been developed for acute cardiovascular diseases, a comprehensive summary is lacking. In this scoping review we aimed to summarize the available evidence on the QI sets for acute cardiovascular diseases, and assess the QI set development process. We followed the Joanna Briggs Institute framework and the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews.
methodsWe conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and major international guidelines on QIs for acute major cardiovascular diseases. The study included articles published after 2000.
resultsAmong the 3112 articles screened, 18 were included in this scoping review. Among the 18 articles included, 12 were on acute coronary syndrome (ACS), five on acute heart failure (AHF), and two on acute aortic dissection (AAD); one article included QIs for both ACS and AHF. Only four of these studies conducted a systematic search with a search strategy. From the 18 articles, 268 QIs containing duplication between articles were identified (191 QIs were for ACS, 57 were for AHF, and 20 were for AAD) and QI measurements varied across articles.
conclusionsThis scoping review provides a comprehensive list of QIs for acute cardiovascular diseases. Our results may be helpful to clinicians and organizations seeking to develop QIs for acute cardiovascular care in the future.
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.