ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2022
Guideline-directed device therapies in heart failure: A clinical practice-based analysis using electronic health record data.
Article in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiac rhythm devices in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction - role, timing, and optimal use in contemporary practice. European Journal of Heart Failure expert consensus document.European journal of heart failure · 2025Review
- Enhancing patient acceptance of ICD implantation through structured shared decision making: conversation is key.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2024Article
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
Background: Guideline-directed device therapies (GDDT) improve outcomes for eligible patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Utilization rates of device therapies in HFrEF after the 2012 ACCF/AHA/HRS Focused Update for Device-based Therapies of Cardiac Rhythm Abnormalities have not been well studied. Objective: Characterize the use of GDDT in newly indicated HFrEF patients from 2012 to 2019 using aggregated electronic health record (EHR) data. Methods: Computable phenotyping algorithms for implantable cardioverter defibrillator/cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (ICD/CRT-D) indications from the GuideLine Indications Detected in EHR for Heart Failure program (GLIDE-HF) used diagnoses, procedures, measures, prescriptions, and the output of natural language processed provider notes from de-identified Optum® EHR data. Patients had a diagnosis of HF, dilated cardiomyopathy, or prior infarct, and were included if they had HFrEF with >1 year of records prior to a new Class 1 or Class 2a indication for an ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) from 2012 to 2019. Results: Records showed 137,476 HFrEF patients were newly indicated for an ICD or CRT-D. GDDT was used in 14,892 of 36,358 (41.0%) CRT-D indicated patients and in 14,904 of 101,118 (14.7%) ICD-indicated patients. While GDDT use was low, 95.7% had echocardiography and 92.1% had prescriptions for beta-blockers or angiotensin-converting enzyme/angiotensin-receptor blockers medications. Conclusions: In this modern cohort of HF patients, a large proportion of eligible patients did not receive ICDs or CRT-Ds, while frequently receiving other indicated cardiovascular interventions and treatments.
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.