Embracing the promise of patient reported outcome measures in cardiology.

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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

1. Standardized and hierarchically classified heart failure and complementary disease monitoring outcome measures: European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart).European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2025
   Pooled it
2. Definitions of clinical study outcome measures for cardiovascular diseases: the European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomized Trials (EuroHeart).European heart journal · 2025
   Pooled it
3. A FeAsibility items Checklist for assessing implementation characTeristics of patient-reported Outcome measures in Research, Regulation and Routine clinical care (FACTOR3): Development and evaluation.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2026
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.