ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Socioeconomic status and equity among patients with cardiogenic shock.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We aimed to analyze the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on management and in-hospital outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). Methods: This was a prospective observational registry conducted (December 2018-November 2019) in Intensive Cardiac Care Units (ICCU) across 8 tertiary care centers. Consecutive patients aged ≥18 years with a primary diagnosis of cardiogenic shock were included. SES was defined using a numerical index that incorporates mean income levels, premature mortality, and avoidable hospitalizations observed within a specific health area. SES values were categorized into tertiles. In-hospital procedures, complications, length of stay, and in-hospital mortality were collected. Results: A total of 382 patients were included (mean age: 65.3 years). There were no differences in age, sex, or major comorbidities across SES groups. CS was more frequently due to acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in patients with low SES (66.9% vs. 58%, Conclusions: Beyond a higher rate of ACS-related CS, patients with low SES exhibited a clinical profile and shock severity comparable to other SES groups. Therapeutic management aligned with guideline recommendations even in patients with low SES.
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.