ReviewJACC. Advances2024
Proposal and Rationale for a Cardioethics Curriculum.
Review in JACC. Advances, 2024. 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.
- Bridging the gaps in interventional cardiology disparities-socioeconomic, geographic, and political inequalities.European heart journal open · 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
The modern practice of cardiovascular medicine involves many ethical controversies in the care of our complex patients. Accordingly, we propose a framework for a practical, clinically based "cardioethics" curriculum that might be incorporated into fellowship training to prepare cardiologists to cope with increasingly complex ethical dilemmas. This work can also be adopted into continuing medical education for cardiologists and other cardiovascular practitioners given the critical importance of collaborative care in cardiology. We discuss heart transplant allocation, futility concerns, withdrawing care, advance care planning, conflicts of interests, and distributive justice. Sound ethical decision-making in cardiology requires a combination of extensive technical knowledge, nuanced appreciation of individual patient goals and values, and thoughtful application of ethical principles and reasoning. Cardiologists have an exceptionally broad toolkit of medications and interventions to address high-stakes disease states. We should maintain a similarly broad ethical toolkit to provide the best care for our patients.
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.