ArticlePloS one2024
Therapeutic interventions for heart failure in Colombia: result of a Delphi panel.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Real-world strategies for pulsed field ablation using a variable-loop circular catheter: a compendium of best practices from early adopters.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to validate the main therapies used in the treatment of heart failure through a clinical consensus conducted by cardiology experts in Colombia.
methodsThe Delphi technique was employed, which involves a series of consultation rounds with experts to reach a consensus. Cardiologists with experience in HF treatment were selected, and they were sent electronic questionnaires to assess the relevance of various therapeutic interventions. Consensus was defined when at least 70% of the experts agreed on the relevance of an intervention.
resultsFourteen cardiology experts participated in the study. In the first round, nine therapeutic interventions were evaluated, but insufficient agreement was reached to form a consensus. A second round was conducted, where feedback was provided to the experts, and they were asked to rate the relevance of the interventions using a Likert scale. Consensus was achieved for eight of the evaluated therapeutic interventions. The focus of the third round was on the interventions that had not reached consensus in the previous rounds.
conclusionsThis study provides clinical consensus on therapeutic interventions for HF in Colombia. Nine therapeutic interventions were identified as relevant by the experts. These findings can help improve HF treatment and optimize clinical outcomes in Colombia. It is important to note that this study was conducted with local experts, and the results may not be generalizable to other populations.
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.