ReviewCureus2024
Health Disparities in Cardiac Critical Care: Understanding Inequities, Barriers, and Pathways Toward Equitable Access and Enhanced Outcomes.
Review in Cureus, 2024. 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.
- Bridging the Gap: Multidisciplinary Decision Making to Address Systemic Barriers in Cardiovascular Care.Current cardiology reports · 2026Review
- Bridging the gaps in interventional cardiology disparities-socioeconomic, geographic, and political inequalities.European heart journal open · 2025Review
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Regarding Hepatitis B and Liver Cancer Among Liver Cancer Patients and Their Families in China.Cancer management and research · 2025Article
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
Health disparities in cardiac critical care continue to pose significant challenges in achieving equitable access and outcomes for diverse populations. This literature review examines the disparities in access to and outcomes of cardiac critical care interventions across different populations, identifies barriers contributing to these disparities, and explores strategies to address them. A literature review was conducted by searching electronic databases for relevant articles published between January 2000 and May 2023. Studies focusing on health disparities in cardiac critical care, access to interventions, outcomes, and equity were included. Data were extracted and synthesized using a narrative approach. Disparities in access to cardiac critical care interventions were identified, including socioeconomic factors, lack of health insurance, geographic barriers, racial and ethnic disparities, language and cultural barriers, limited health literacy, and lack of awareness and education. These barriers led to delayed diagnoses, suboptimal utilization of interventions, and limited access to specialized cardiac care. Disparities in outcomes were also observed, with certain populations experiencing worse clinical outcomes and higher morbidity and mortality rates. This review emphasizes the existence of disparities in cardiac critical care and emphasizes the necessity for interventions to address these disparities. Specific strategies should concentrate on enhancing healthcare access, diminishing financial obstacles, expanding health insurance coverage, fostering patient-centered approaches, and harnessing telemedicine and technology. Collaborative efforts among policymakers, healthcare providers, researchers, and patient advocates are vital to advocate for policy changes and implement evidence-based interventions that foster equitable care. Future research should prioritize longitudinal studies, implementation science, patient engagement, global perspectives, and rigorous evaluation of intervention strategies to advance our knowledge and guide endeavors in reducing health disparities in cardiac critical care.
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.