ArticleESC heart failure2025
Delay in cardiology consultation after primary care physician referrals in heart failure: Clinical implications.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing Supply, Demand, and Adequacy of Cardiologists in the United States: Projecting a National Shortage.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Improvement of Heart Failure Discrimination by the Integration of the Left Ventricle Global Longitudinal Strain.Clinics and practice · 2026Article
- From innovation to implementation: expanding global access to mechanical circulatory support and heart transplantation.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Continuity of primary care and its impact on prognosis in patients with heart failure referred for cardiology consultation.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Delay in cardiology consultation after primary care physician referrals in heart failure: Clinical implications.ESC heart failure · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo investigate the association between the elapsed time to cardiology care following a primary care physician (PCP) referral and 1 year outcomes among patients with heart failure (HF).
methodsData from electronic medical records at our institution encompassing all PCP referrals to cardiology consultation from 2010 to 2021 (N = 68 518) were analysed. Of these, 6379 patients had a prior diagnosis of HF. Using a Cox regression model for hospitalization and mortality outcomes, the association between delay time in cardiology care post-PCP referral and 1 year outcomes was examined, adjusting for age, gender and comorbidities.
resultsA significant increase in 1 year mortality rates with delayed cardiology care was observed for each day: all-cause (0.25%), cardiovascular (CV) (0.13%) and HF (0.11%). In multivariate analysis, continuous delay to consultation was independently associated with higher risk of all-cause [hazard ratio (HR): 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.01-1.02); P < 0.01], CV [1.01 (1.00-1.02); P < 0.01] and HF mortality (HR: 1.01; 95% CI 1.00-1.03; P < 0.01). Patients attended in the 25th quartile of time delay (<2 days) had significantly lower mortality and HF readmission rates [1.21 (1.10-1.33); P < 0.01] as compared with patients in the 75th quartile (>14 days).
conclusionsDelay in cardiology assistance following a PCP referral among patients previously diagnosed with HF was associated with increased in all-cause, CV, and HF mortality at 1 year.
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.