ArticleBMC research notes2024
Use of health services and perceived need for information and follow-up after percutaneous coronary intervention.
Article in BMC research notes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Continuity of Care, Adherence to Treatment and Self-reported Health After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (CONCARD): a Patient-centered Care Study
eCardiacRehab - a Pragmatic Trial on a Home-based Patient-centered e-Health Programme With Tailored Solutions - Feasibility Study
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Co-Creation and Usability Testing of a Digital Cardiac Rehabilitation Program (eCardiacRehab): Design and Development Study.JMIR cardio · 2026Article
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Urban and Rural Patients' Experience With Care and Treatment During the Hospital Stay.Journal of patient experience · 2026Article
- Association of obstructive sleep apnea with cardiovascular events in acute coronary syndrome patients with dual risk of remnant cholesterol and low-grade inflammation: a post-hoc analysis of the OSA-ACS study.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 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
9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveFew patients achieve full control of their coronary artery disease (CAD) risk factors. Follow-up, such as cardiac rehabilitation, is important to increase adherence to lifestyle changes and treatment, to improve the patient's risk profile, and to treat established complications of CAD clinical events. However, the type of follow-up patients receive varies. Therefore, the aim of this research note was to describe and compare patients' self-reported use of health services, the type of follow-up patients reported to prefer, and the type of information patients reported to be important, in two countries with different follow-up practices after PCI.
resultsWe included 3417 patients in Norway and Denmark, countries with different follow-up strategies after PCI. The results showed large differences between the countries regarding health services used. In Denmark the most frequently used health services were consultations at outpatient clinics followed by visits to the general practitioner and visits to the fitness centre, whereas in Norway visits to the general practitioner were most common, followed by rehospitalisation and no follow-up used. However, patients found the same type of follow-up and information important in both countries. Patients' perceived need for follow-up and information decreased over time, suggesting a need for early follow-up when the patients are motivated.
trial registrationNCT03810612 (18/01/2019).
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.