ReviewEuropean heart journal open2026
Overview of methodology and characteristics of national acute coronary syndrome registries in high-income countries: a scoping review.
Review in European heart journal open, 2026. 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.
- Overview of methodology and characteristics of national acute coronary syndrome registries in high-income countries: a scoping review.European heart journal open · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: The role of clinical quality registries is to collect structured observational data in routine clinical practice to monitor the quality of care provided to specific patient populations. There is currently no standardized methodology of how to establish registry platforms. The objective of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the methodology and characteristics of established national acute coronary syndrome registries. Methods and results: Three electronic databases were searched to identify national registries in high-income countries collecting routine clinical data on adult patients with suspected and/or diagnosed acute coronary syndrome. Articles published from the year 2000 onwards that described the protocol and/or quantitative results of such registries located in 25 countries with the largest gross domestic product were included. There were 24 countries with an established national registry, of which nine are currently active. Inclusion criteria varied across these registries, with a predominant focus on either a suspected or confirmed diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome or myocardial infarction. The primary clinical outcomes measured were all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events during hospitalization, as well as at 30-day and/or 1 year time points. The main sources of follow-up data were hospital discharge records and administrative data. Conclusion: Globally, acute coronary syndrome clinical quality registries share similar fundamental objectives of monitoring and improving or sustaining the highest quality of care. However, there is considerable variation in the design of national registries and better harmonization of fundamental issues, such as who is included, core data, and key outcomes, would be beneficial.
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.