ArticleHealth economics review2025
Behavioural insights in the underuse of cardiac resynchronisation therapy in heart failure: a pilot survey on incentive perceptions among referring cardiologists.
Article in Health economics review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness of the ABCStroke pathway in ischaemic stroke care: a UK pilot analysis.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2026Article
- Multisource Sensor Fusion and Large Language Model Integration for Explainable State Perception and Anomaly Awareness.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Predictors of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy in patients undergoing AV nodal ablation: insights from a Delphi process and retrospective cohort study.European heart journal open · 2026Article
- Conduction System Pacing With AV Node Ablation Versus Pulmonary Vein Isolation: Emerging Evidence.JACC. Asia · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsHeart failure is a leading cause of hospitalisation in patients over 50, significantly impacting both quality of life and survival. Despite the well-established benefits of Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy (CRT), its utilisation in clinical practice remains suboptimal. Traditional incentives, have shown limited effectiveness in increasing CRT referrals. This manuscript explores how behavioural economics can offer a novel framework for improving CRT uptake by leveraging behavioural incentives, particularly choice architecture and social incentives, to influence physician referral patterns. METHODS AND
resultsWe underscore key concepts of behavioural economics, including choice architecture (nudges, reference points, sludges), cognitive biases (status quo bias, overconfidence bias, availability bias), and social incentives, which are applied in designing incentives to promote CRT referrals. A survey was conducted with 51 physicians from six European countries, including electrophysiologists, heart failure specialists, and general cardiologists, recruited through cardiology networks and personal contacts. Participants rated their perceptions of five incentive strategies using a Likert scale (1-5). Behavioural incentives, such as peer comparison through league tables (social incentive) and decision prompts in electronic health records (choice architecture nudge), were perceived as more effective than traditional financial incentives, with a median Likert score of 4.0 [IQR 3.0-5.0] versus 2.5 [IQR 1.5-3.0] for traditional incentives (p < 0.001).
conclusionsThese findings suggest that interventions drawing on behavioural economics, particularly those utilising social incentives and choice architecture redesign, may offer more effective to increasing CRT referrals than traditional incentives. Such interventions could enhance CRT uptake and outcomes for heart failure patients.
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.