ReviewHeart rhythm2022
Opportunities and challenges in heart rhythm research: Rationale and development of an electrophysiology collaboratory.
Review in Heart rhythm, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Factors of engagement in research after graduation from EP fellowship: An HRS survey.Heart rhythm · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There are many challenges in the current landscape of electrophysiology (EP) clinical and translational research, including increasing costs and complexity, competing demands, regulatory requirements, and challenges with study implementation. This review seeks to broadly discuss the state of EP research, including challenges and opportunities. Included here are results from a Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) Research Committee member survey detailing HRS members' perspectives regarding both barriers to clinical and translational research and opportunities to address these challenges. We also provide stakeholder perspectives on barriers and opportunities for future EP research, including input from representatives of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, industry, and research funding institutions that participated in a Research Collaboratory Summit convened by HRS. This review further summarizes the experiences of the heart failure and heart valve communities and how they have approached similar challenges in their own fields. We then explore potential solutions, including various models of research ecosystems designed to identify research challenges and to coordinate ways to address them in a collaborative fashion in order to optimize innovation, increase efficiency of evidence generation, and advance the development of new therapeutic products. The objectives of the proposed collaborative cardiac EP research community are to encourage and support scientific discourse, research efficiency, and evidence generation by exploring collaborative and equitable solutions in which stakeholders within the EP community can interact to address knowledge gaps, innovate, and advance new therapies.
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.