ArticleEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2025
PULSE survey: Population Survey on Knowledge, Gaps and Perception of Heart Rhythm disorders-an initiative of the Scientific Initiatives Committee of the European Heart Rhythm Association.
Article in 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, 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.
- Population reach and participation rate in opportunistic vs. systematic atrial fibrillation screening: STROKESTOP III.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 · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsDespite increasing prevalence, the general population lacks knowledge regarding diagnosis, implications, and management of cardiac arrhythmias (CA). This study aims to assess public perception of CA and identify knowledge gaps. METHODS AND
resultsThe 36-item PULSE survey was disseminated via social media to the general population and conducted under the auspices of the European Heart Rhythm Association Scientific Initiatives Committee (EHRA SIC) with EHRA patient committee support. Among 3924 participants (2177 healthy, 1747 with previously diagnosed CA; 59% female, 90% European), 81% reported fear of CA. Females were more likely to be 'very' or 'moderately afraid' than males [odds ratio (OR) 1.159 (1.005, 1.337), P = 0.046]. While most recognized complications of CA-heart failure (82%), stroke (80%), and death (75%)-43% were unaware that CA can be asymptomatic. Those with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training in the past 5 years were 2.6 times and 4.7 times more confident identifying sudden cardiac death and initiating CPR (P < 0.001). Confidence was lower in retired participants [OR 0.574 (0.499, 0.660), P < 0.001] and Southern Europeans [OR 0.703 (0.600, 0.824), P < 0.001]. Without CPR training, only 15% felt confident initiating CPR. Among CA participants, 28% reported severe to disabling daily symptoms. Males were more often asymptomatic (20% vs. 9%, P < 0.001). Treatment rates were comparable between sex categories (81% vs. 79%, P = 0.413). Interdisciplinary shared decision-making processes were reported by 4%. Notably, 1 in 10 CA cases was self-diagnosed using a wearable device, and 30% of CA participants used smartwatches for self-monitoring.
conclusionSignificant knowledge gaps regarding CA exist in the general population. Targeted educational initiatives could be a viable tool to enhance public knowledge, confidence in detecting and managing arrhythmias, particularly for women, who experience greater fear and symptom severity despite similar treatment rates.
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.