ReviewJournal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA2022
Quality care in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
Review in Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of emergency quality improvement program on the prognosis of patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in Taiwan.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Pathogen Distribution, Drug Resistance, and Postoperative High-Quality Nursing Intervention Effectiveness in Knee Osteoarthritis Patients After Knee Arthroplasty With Postoperative Infection.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Recent advances in the diagnosis and management of acute myocardial infarction.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2023Review
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
Over the past decades, the treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been redefined with the incorporation of evidence from multiple clinical trials. Recommendations from guidelines are updated regularly to reduce morbidity and mortality. However, heterogeneous care systems, physician perspectives, and patient behavior still lead to a disparity between evidence and clinical practice. The quality of care has been established and become an integral part of modern healthcare in order to increase the likelihood of desired health outcomes and adhere to professional knowledge. For patients with STEMI, measuring the quality of care is a multifactorial and multidimensional process that cannot be estimated solely based on patients' clinical outcomes. The care of STEMI is similar to the concept of "the chain of survival" that emphasizes the importance of seamless integration of five links: early recognition and diagnosis, timely reperfusion, evidence-based medications, control of cholesterol, and cardiac rehabilitation. Serial quality indicators, reflecting the full spectrum of care, have become a widely used tool for assessing performance. Comprehension of every aspect of quality assessment and indicators might be too demanding for a physician. However, it is worthwhile to understand the concepts involved in quality improvement since every physician wants to provide better care for their patients. This article reviews a fundamental approach to quality care in STEMI.
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.