ArticleJournal of primary care & community health
Primary Care Signals and Diagnostic Pathways Before Incident Heart Failure: A Systematic Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of primary care & community health. 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
IntroductionHeart failure may be preceded by non-specific symptoms or indicators recorded in primary care, although these records do not necessarily represent heart failure or missed diagnosis. We mapped quantitative evidence on prediagnostic signals, investigation, referral, diagnosis setting and outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a systematic scoping review of quantitative observational studies of incident or newly diagnosed adult heart failure that included a primary care, community or ambulatory first-contact component. Databases were searched from January 2000 to 1 May 2026. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data and assessed risk of bias using Joanna Briggs Institute tools. Heterogeneous findings were synthesised narratively and organised by dataset family.ResultsEleven reports were included as sources of evidence. Most were UK retrospective linked-record cohorts; six reports used overlapping national English data, and five used independent datasets from Portugal, other UK regions and the USA. Recorded symptoms or indicators before diagnosis occurred in 30.0% to 66.5% of patients. Among 80,824 English patients with prior indicators diagnosed in 2015-19, 12.5% had recorded natriuretic peptide testing, 19.8% echocardiography and 34.4% specialist referral in the six months before diagnosis. Hospital or acute-care diagnosis was common and was associated with poorer mortality, admission or cost outcomes. Repeat consultations and clinicians' responses to recurrence were rarely measured directly.ConclusionThe evidence describes recorded prediagnostic intervals and pathway gaps, not proven missed or avoidable diagnostic delay. It does not establish repeated or unresolved presentation as a clinical trigger. Primary studies should define recurrence, determine whether earlier records plausibly reflected heart failure, and adjudicate whether repeated presentation identifies preventable diagnostic opportunities.
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.