ArticleHeart rhythm O22024
2024 HRS perspective on advancing workflows for CIED remote monitoring.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- EHRA perspective on the digital data revolution in arrhythmia management: insights from the association's annual summit.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Review
- State of the Journal 2025.Heart rhythm O2 · 2025Article
- Clinical experience with remote programming of cardiac implantable electronic devices.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) generate substantial data, often stored in image or PDF formats. Remote monitoring, now an integral component of patient care, places considerable administrative burdens on clinicians and staff, in large part due to the challenge of integrating these data seamlessly into electronic health records. Since 2006, the Heart Rhythm Society, in collaboration with the CIED industry, has led an initiative to establish a unified standard nomenclature. This effort has harmonized terminology, aligning diverse terms with single terms approved by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. With this foundational work complete, attention now turns to developing technical standards for interoperability, which would enable the smooth communication of CIED data between information technology systems used in clinical practice. In this article, by leveraging Health Level 7 Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources, we present a road map for the technical committee to guide this endeavor. We identify critical data exchange points between remote transceivers, electronic health records, and third-party platforms commonly used for CIED patient data management. Our objective is to establish bidirectional communication among these resources, ensuring the accuracy, timeliness, and accessibility of clinical data for clinicians. We also anticipate substantial benefits for both clinical research and administrative efficiency through the implementation of this interoperability framework.
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.