ReviewPatient preference and adherence2025
Home-Based Self-Management After Permanent Pacemaker Implantation: What Should Patients Know.
Review in Patient preference and adherence, 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.
- Analysis of the status and influencing factors of early ambulation in patients with pelvic floor dysfunction after surgery.Frontiers in medicine · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study is to systematically explore and summarize the best evidence of home-based self-management in patients with permanent pacemaker implantation, providing comprehensive references and guidance for improving the self-management ability of such patients. Methods: Using the "6S" model, a systematic literature search was conducted on home-based self-management in patients with permanent pacemaker implantation. The types of literature included best practice, clinical decision-making, guidelines, expert consensus, systematic review and evidence summary. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, two researchers screened the literature, evaluated the quality, extracted the data, synthesized the evidence. Data Sources: BMJ Best Practice, Up To Date, Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI), the World Health Organization (WHO), the Guidelines International Network (GIN), the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario (RNAO), the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), the American Heart Association (AHA), the Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Medlive, CNKI Database, SinoMed (China Biomedical Literature Database), Wanfang Database and VIP Database. The retrieval period spanned from the establishment of these databases until January 31, 2025. Results: A total of 21 articles were included, 1 best practice, 9 clinical decision-making, 5 guidelines, 3 expert consensus, 1 systematic review, and 2 evidence summaries. Thirty-five pieces of the best evidence from 7 aspects were summarized, including complication management, electromagnetic interference management, sports rehabilitation management, operative limb management, postoperative follow-up management, role management, and emotional management. Conclusion: This review comprehensively summarized the best evidence home-based self-management in patients with permanent pacemaker implantation. These findings are scientific and referential, and provide evidence-based support for nursing and management of patients during home-based rehabilitation.
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.