ArticleHeliyon2024
Peer-support interventions and related outcomes in patients with myocardial infarction: A systematic review.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Peer Support for Women with Heart Disease: Program Description and Evaluation of Women@Heart.CJC open · 2025Article
- Adaptation of a person-centred care intervention to enhance self-efficacy in patients following a myocardial infarction (P2MIR): a qualitative study exploring the needs and preferences of key stakeholders within a Portuguese healthcare context.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Evaluating Cardiovascular Patient Support Groups: A Cross-Sectional Control-Group Questionnaire Study of Patients and Healthcare Providers.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Collapse of Brain Clearance: Glymphatic-Venous Failure, Aquaporin-4 Breakdown, and AI-Empowered Precision Neurotherapeutics in Intracranial Hypertension.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Article
- Acceptance of Illness and Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients After Myocardial Infarction-Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Myocardial infarction (MI) is one of the main causes of disability and death worldwide. Peer-support can ameliorate the psychological and physical morbidities associated with heart diseases. The aim of this study was to determine whether peer-support interventions could improve the psychological and behavioral health outcomes commonly experienced by MI patients. Methods: In this systematic review, international databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched to gather related publications up to March 2023. Eligible papers were those addressing the outcomes of peer-support interventions in individuals with a history of MI. Result: Twelve clinical trials published in English with a Jadad score of 3 or 4 (out of 5) were included in the final review. These studies used four approaches to deliver peer-support interventions: face-to-face, telephone-based, educational videos, and group discussion. The results showed that peer-support could have a positive effect on depression, anxiety, quality of life, sexual performance, self-care, and medication adherence. Conclusion: Considering the serious impacts of MI on life, these patients need empowerment training. Peer-support can be used as a complementary supportive method to reduce MI patients' psychological complications and improve their behavioral outcomes.
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.