SynthesisMedicine2019
Collaborative care intervention for patients with chronic heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Collaborative Care for Chronic Pain After Traumatic Brain Injury: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Long-term outcomes in patients with postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome with an average follow-up of over 20 years.Journal of internal medicine · 2026Article
- Non-pharmacological and psychosocial interventions for comorbid hypertension and depression: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Quality of Life in Palliative Care: A Systematic Meta-Review of Reviews and Meta-Analyses.Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH · 2024Article
- An evidence map of systematic reviews on models of outpatient care for patients with chronic heart diseases.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- Efficacy of digital health interventions on depression and anxiety in patients with cardiac disease: a systematic review and meta-analysisEuropean heart journal. Digital health · 2022Review
- Testing of a health-related quality of life model in patients with heart failure: A cross-sectional, correlational study.Geriatric nursing (New York, N.Y.)Article
- Characterizing Pain Leading to Emergency Medical Services Activation in Heart Failure.The Journal of cardiovascular nursingArticle
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
introductionPatients with chronic heart failure (HF) show many symptoms that worsen the quality of life (QoL). Collaborative care intervention (CCI) aims to improve the QoL and symptoms by integrating psychosocial and palliative strategies in chronic care.
methodsThe PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases were searched from inception to September 2018. The included studies were used to determine pooled standard mean differences (SMDs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The data were assessed by fixed- and random effects models, respectively.
resultsTwenty-one studies including 2999 patients with chronic heart failure were included. The results showed significantly improved QoL in the CCI group compared with the routine care group (SMD = 0.60, 95%CI 0.27-0.94, Pheterogeneity < .001, I = 94.1%). The patients who received face-to-face interventions experienced a significant improvement (SMD = 0.54, 95%CI 0.24-0.85, Pheterogeneity < .001, I = 88.7%) in terms of QoL compared with those administered only telephone interventions. Furthermore, significantly improved anxiety level (SMD = 0.33, 95%CI 0.12-0.55, Pheterogeneity = .612, I = 0%) and 6-min walk test (SMD = 0.46, 95%CI 0.29-0.64, Pheterogeneity = .458, I = 0%) were found in the CCI group compared with the routine care group.
conclusionThese findings confirmed that collaborative care intervention effectively improves the quality of life as well as psychological (anxiety) and physical (6-min walk test) functions in patients with chronic heart failure compared with routine care. Furthermore, face-to-face interventions show a greater improvement of QoL compared with telephone-only interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.