ArticlePloS one2023
Stent for life initiative in Portugal: Progress through years and Covid-19 impact.
Article in PloS one, 2023. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Every minute of delay (still) counts!Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring Stent for Life Initiative in Portugal lifetime, positive changes in ST elevation myocardial infarction treatment were observed, by the increase of Primary Angioplasty numbers and improvements in patients' behaviour towards myocardial infarction, with an increase in those who called 112 and the lower proportion attending non primary percutaneous coronary intervention centres. Despite public awareness campaigns and system educational programmes, patient and system delay did not change significantly over this period. The aim of this study was to address the public awareness campaign effectiveness on peoples' behaviour facing STEMI, and how Covid-19 has affected STEMI treatment.
methodsData from 1381 STEMI patients were collected during a one-month period each year, from 2011 to 2016, and during one and a half month, matching first lockdown in Portugal 2020. Four groups were constituted: Group A (2011); Group B (2012&2013); Group C (2015&2016) and group D (2020).
resultsThe proportion of patients who called 112, increased significantly (35.2% Group A; 38.7% Group B; 44.0% Group C and 49.6% Group D, p = 0.005); significant reduction was observed in the proportion of patients who attended healthcare centres without PPCI (54.5% group A; 47.6% Group B; 43.2% Group C and 40.9% Group D, p = 0.016), but there were no differences on groups comparison. Total ischemic time, measured from symptoms onset to reperfusion increased progressively from group A [250.0 (178.0-430.0)] to D [296.0 (201.0-457.5.8)] p = 0.012, with statistically significant difference between group C and D (p = 0.034).
conclusionsDuring the term of SFL initiative in Portugal, patients resorted less to primary health centres and called more to 112. These results can be attributed the public awareness campaign. Nevertheless, patient and system delays did not significantly change over this period, mainly in late years of SFL, probably for low efficacy of campaigns and in 2020 due to Covid-19 pandemic.
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.