ArticleJournal of cardiac failure2024
Palliative Care Education in Cardiovascular Disease Fellowships: A National Survey of Program Directors.
Article in Journal of cardiac failure, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Palliative Care Education in Pediatric Cardiology Fellowships: A Survey of Program Directors.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Palliative and End-of-Life Care During Critical Cardiovascular Illness: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPalliative care (PC) is an essential component of high-quality care for people with cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, little is known about the current state of PC education in CVD training, including attitudes toward integration of PC into training and implementation of PC by the program's leadership.
methodsWe developed a nationwide, cross-sectional survey that queried education approaches, perspectives and barriers to PC education in general CVD fellowship training. The survey was distributed to 392 members of the American College of Cardiology Program Director (PD) listserv, representing 290 general CVD fellowships between 1/2023 and 4/2023. We performed descriptive and ꭕ
resultsOf the program's representatives, 56 completed the survey (response rate = 19.3%). Respondents identified themselves as current PDs (89%), associate PDs (8.9%) or former PDs (1.8%), representing a diverse range of program sizes and types and regions of the country. Respondents reported the use of informal bedside teaching (88%), formal didactics (59%), online or self-paced modules (13%), in-person simulation (11%), and clinical rotations (16%) to teach PC content. Most programs covered PC topics at least annually, although there was variability by topic. We found no associations between program demographics and type or frequency of PC education. Most respondents reported dissatisfaction with the quantity (62%) or quality (59%) of the PC education provided. Barriers to PC education included an overabundance of other content to cover (36%) and perceived lack of fellow (20%) or faculty (18%) interest. Comments demonstrated the importance of PC education in fellowship, the lack of a requirement to provide PC education, difficulty in covering all topics, and suggestions of how PC skills should be taught.
conclusionsIn a national survey of CVD educational leadership concerning approaches to PC education in CVD training, respondents highlighted both challenges to implementation of formal PC curricula in cardiology training and opportunities for comprehensive PC education.
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.