Observational studyEuropean heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes2025
Characteristics, use of guideline-recommended medical therapies and clinical outcomes of patients with heart failure not enrolled in a quality registry: a comparison with the Swedish Heart Failure Registry.
Observational study in European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes, 2025. 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.
- Characteristics, clinical management and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction enrolled or not enrolled in a quality registry.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionQuality registries may involve specific inclusion criteria, detailed investigations, or selected hospitals and practitioners, which are not random. Whether the care and outcomes in quality registries are generalizable to the broader population is not well known. We here examine care indicators and outcomes in heart failure (HF) patients enrolled vs. non-enrolled in Swedish Heart Failure (SwedeHF) quality registry. METHODS AND
resultsObservational study of 90-day survivors after a HF in Stockholm (2012-2021). We linked health records from the Stockholm Creatinine Measurements project with SwedeHF. Participants enrolled in SwedeHF were compared to those non-enrolled, focusing on settings of care, use of guideline-recommended therapies, treatment adherence, dose titration, persistence, and outcomes. Analyses considered stratification by settings of management (primary care, cardiology-outpatient, and cardiology-inpatient care). We identified 48 374 incident HF cases of which 4878 (10%) were enrolled in SwedeHF within 90 days. Enrolled participants were younger, more often men and had fewer comorbidities than non-enrolled. Enrolled participants were more likely to initiate, persist and adhere to, and achieve higher dosages of guideline-recommended HF therapies (P < 0.05 for all). Enrolled participants were less likely to experience a major cardiovascular event [CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke; HR 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86-0.99] and all-cause death (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.82-0.92), but had similar rates of HF hospitalization (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94-1.15) compared to non-enrolled ones. Findings were similar across settings of management.
conclusionEnrollment in the SwedeHF registry occurred in a minority of patients, and was associated with better adherence to guideline-recommended HF therapies and fewer major cardiovascular events and lower mortality. The generalizability of these HF registry findings to all HF patients was, however, limited.
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.