ArticleBMJ open2026
Mental disorders, receipt of cardiac care following myocardial infarction and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: a cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare receipt of guideline-informed myocardial infarction (MI) care by mental disorder and assess how the COVID-19 pandemic affected associations.
designA population-based cohort study using linked electronic health records.
settingEngland, November 2019 to February 2023.
participants131 075 adults with non-ST-elevation MI (NSTEMI) and 79 045 adults with ST-elevation MI (STEMI) were identified from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project, and their prior diagnoses of mental disorder were ascertained from linked hospitalisation and primary care records. OUTCOME MEASURES: We compared guideline-informed care standards for each of NSTEMI and STEMI between people with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or depression versus those without any of these disorders. We used logistic regression to adjust for confounders and investigate differences over time.
resultsMental disorder disparities were more evident for NSTEMI than STEMI. Following NSTEMI, people with a mental disorder had lower odds of angiography eligibility and receipt, cardiac ward admission and cardiac rehabilitation referral. ORs (95% CIs) ranged from 0.25 (0.20 to 0.31) for angiography receipt for schizophrenia to 0.92 (0.89 to 0.96) for cardiac ward admission for depression. Following STEMI, people with bipolar disorder were less likely to meet the 150 min call-to-balloon target (OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.93), and people with schizophrenia were less likely to receive rehabilitation referral (OR 0.38; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.61) or indicated secondary prevention medication (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.77). There was no clear evidence that the COVID-19 pandemic affected disparities.
conclusionsPeople with a mental disorder are less likely to receive guideline-informed MI care, with disparities greatest following NSTEMI and for people with schizophrenia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42697570What 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.