ArticlePloS one2025
Establishing consensus on the implementation of Anticoagulation Stewardship Program with cardiologists in Pakistan: A Delphi study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Anticoagulation Stewardship Program (ASP) improves clinical outcomes, promotes patient safety, and supports healthcare systems in delivering high-quality, evidence-based anticoagulation management. This study aimed to develop a consensus among cardiologists about the implementation of the ASP Program in Pakistan.
methodsA three-round Delphi study was conducted utilizing an online questionnaire. In Round 1, cardiologists (Delphi panel experts) reported their consensus with the items in the questionnaire using a 3-point Likert scale. The selection of items for Round 2 was based on acceptance by ≥66.6% of the cardiologists and the agreement of the scientific committee. In Round 2, the panelists assessed those items that failed to gain consensus in Round 1. In Round 3, a face-to-face meeting was conducted among the scientific committee to evaluate the items that failed to gain expert agreement in Round 2 to form the final consensus document. Descriptive statistics was used to present the data.
resultsA total of 90 cardiologists from 30 hospitals were invited to participate in the study. Of these, 75 agreed to participate in Round 1 of the study (83% response rate). 68 cardiologists completed the survey in Round 2. Initially, 33 items from four domains were evaluated by the Delphi experts in Round 1. 18 items reached consensus in Round 1, 4 items reached consensus in Round 2, and 2 items reached consensus in Round 3. The final consensus document comprised 24 items. The study showed absolute consensus among national cardiologists regarding the implementation of ASP in Pakistan. A considerable agreement was achieved regarding essential components needed to strengthen ASP for anticoagulation management in the cardiology departments.
conclusionThis study emphasized the need for educational sessions for patients and healthcare professionals, collaboration with healthcare authorities, and allocation of financial resources for ASP. This study also identified consensus among cardiologists on the perceived benefits of ASP for patients and the healthcare system. Several barriers that hindered the implementation of ASP in Pakistan were identified, including patient- and healthcare system-related barriers.
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.