ArticleBMC nursing2023
A systematic review on clinical guidelines of home health care in heart failure patients.
Article in BMC nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adaptation of a clinical practice guideline for home care nursing in heart failure patients: a multi-method study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Rehabilitation needs and adherence among TAVR patients and their caregivers during digital home-based cardiac rehabilitation: a qualitative longitudinal study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Article
- The Negative Impact of Insulin Resistance/Hyperinsulinemia on Chronic Heart Failure and the Potential Benefits of Its Screening and Treatment.Biomedicines · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background"Guidelines for the care of heart failure patients at home support safe and effective evidence-based practice. The aims of the present study were: [1] to identify guidelines addressing the care at home for adults with heart failure and [2] evaluate the quality of the guidelines and the extent to which they address eight components of home-based HF disease management."
methodsA systematic review was conducted of articles published between 1st of January 2000 to 17th of May 2021 using the databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, and nine specific websites for guideline development organisations. Clinical guidelines for HF patients with recommendations relevant to care provision at home were included. The results were reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA-2020) criteria. The quality of included guidelines was evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II (AGREE-II) by two authors independently. Guidelines were evaluated for their coverage of eight components of HF care at home, consisting of integration, multi-disciplinary care, continuity of care, optimized treatment, patient education, patient and partner participation, care plans with clear goals of care, self-care management and palliative care.
resultsTen HF guidelines, including two nursing-focused guidelines and eight general guidelines were extracted from 280 studies. After evaluation of quality by AGREE-II, two guidelines obtained the highest score: "NICE" and the "Adapting HF guideline for nursing care in home health care settings. Five guidelines addressed all eight components of care at home while the others had six or seven.
conclusionsThis systematic review identified ten guidelines addressing care at home for patients with HF. The highest quality guidelines most relevant to the care at home of patients with HF are the "NICE" and "Adapting HF guideline for nursing care in home health care settings" and would be most appropriate for use by home healthcare nurses.
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.