ReviewClinical epidemiology2026
New Zealand Electronic Health Data for Cardiovascular Research: A Review.
Review in Clinical epidemiology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Aotearoa New Zealand is among the few countries that routinely collect and utilize individual-level, linked electronic health data for cardiovascular research. This comprehensive health data infrastructure supports large-scale registry-based research, including observational studies and pragmatic randomized clinical trials embedded within registries. Objective: In this review, we evaluate the scope and utility of New Zealand's electronic health data for cardiovascular research. First, we present an overview of the demographics and epidemiological trends in cardiovascular disease within New Zealand. Second, we describe the primary health data sources used in cardiovascular research and assess their coverage, content, linkage capabilities, and data quality. Finally, we explore the future potential of these data assets to advance cardiovascular research, highlighting exemplar applications and key ethical, legal, and infrastructural considerations. We also compare New Zealand's electronic health data with those of the Nordic countries and the United Kingdom, whose well-established registry systems offer valuable insights for informing New Zealand's approach to registry-based research and suggest opportunities for future cross-country collaborative research. Results: Cardiovascular research in New Zealand is informed by a combination of nationwide administrative registries, clinical quality registries, and researcher-initiated registries, all linkable via a unique health identifier. These data sources provide comprehensive information on healthcare services, clinical practice, and broader social determinants such as socioeconomic conditions. While data quality and completeness vary, several collections, particularly large researcher-initiated cohorts, demonstrate high utility for observational studies, registry-enabled clinical trials, risk prediction modelling, and quality improvement initiatives. Additionally, New Zealand's health data infrastructure demonstrates the potential for international cardiovascular research. Conclusion: New Zealand's electronic health data represent a valuable resource for cardiovascular research, with applicability to both observational studies and clinical trials.
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.