Gap finder
Search review questions
Each row is one question a systematic review asked: who, what, compared with what, and which outcome, with the effect it found and how certain that is. Words match anywhere in the field.
1,554 questions in 140 reviews · Heart
current versionsNo studies 272 · 17.5%Ungraded 44 · 2.8%Very low 329 · 21.2%Low 464 · 29.9%Moderate 319 · 20.5%High 126 · 8.1%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
| Question | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Intervention NR LVEF (%) measured by MRI Long‐term · people with chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure Stem cell therapy for chronic ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 25 participants | Low |
Does treatment guided by serial BNP or NT‐proBNP monitoring improve outcomes vs treatment guided by clinical assessment alone? All‐cause mortality · patients with heart failure B‐type natriuretic peptide‐guided treatment for heart failure (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.87 [0.76, 1.01] | 15 studies · 3169 participants | Low |
Does treatment guided by serial BNP or NT‐proBNP monitoring improve outcomes vs treatment guided by clinical assessment alone? Heart failure mortality · patients with heart failure B‐type natriuretic peptide‐guided treatment for heart failure (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.84 [0.54, 1.3] | 6 studies · 853 participants | Low |
Does treatment guided by serial BNP or NT‐proBNP monitoring improve outcomes vs treatment guided by clinical assessment alone? Heart failure admissions · patients with heart failure B‐type natriuretic peptide‐guided treatment for heart failure (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.7 [0.61, 0.8] | 10 studies · 1928 participants | Low |
Does treatment guided by serial BNP or NT‐proBNP monitoring improve outcomes vs treatment guided by clinical assessment alone? All‐cause admissions · patients with heart failure B‐type natriuretic peptide‐guided treatment for heart failure (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.93 [0.84, 1.03] | 6 studies · 1142 participants | Low |
Does treatment guided by serial BNP or NT‐proBNP monitoring improve outcomes vs treatment guided by clinical assessment alone? Adverse events · patients with heart failure B‐type natriuretic peptide‐guided treatment for heart failure (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 6 studies · 1144 participants | Low |
Does treatment guided by serial BNP or NT‐proBNP monitoring improve outcomes vs treatment guided by clinical assessment alone? Cost · patients with heart failure B‐type natriuretic peptide‐guided treatment for heart failure (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 1051 participants | Low |
Does treatment guided by serial BNP or NT‐proBNP monitoring improve outcomes vs treatment guided by clinical assessment alone? Quality of life Scale from: 0 to 105. · patients with heart failure B‐type natriuretic peptide‐guided treatment for heart failure (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 8 studies · 1812 participants | Very low |
Carvedilol vs placebo All‐cause mortality · heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.69 [0.12, 3.88] | 2 studies · 69 participants | Very low |
Rosuvastatin vs placebo Time to heart decompensation · chronic heart failure in Chagas cardiomyopathy patients Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 39 participants | Ungraded |
Rosuvastatin vs placebo Disease‐free period at 30, 60 and 90 days · chronic heart failure in Chagas cardiomyopathy patients Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 39 participants | Ungraded |
Rosuvastatin vs placebo Quality of life · chronic heart failure in Chagas cardiomyopathy patients Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 39 participants | Very low |
Rosuvastatin vs placebo Adverse events · chronic heart failure in Chagas cardiomyopathy patients Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 39 participants | Ungraded |
Rosuvastatin vs placebo Hospital readmissions (heart failure‐ or adverse event‐related) · chronic heart failure in Chagas cardiomyopathy patients Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 39 participants | Ungraded |
Carvedilol vs placebo Cardiac mortality at 30 days · heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 69 participants | Ungraded |
Carvedilol vs placebo Time‐to‐heart decompensation · heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 69 participants | Ungraded |
Carvedilol vs placebo Disease‐free period (at 30, 60, and 90 days) · heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 69 participants | Ungraded |
Carvedilol vs placebo Overall survival · heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 39 participants | Very low |
Carvedilol vs placebo Quality of life · heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low |
Carvedilol vs placebo Adverse events · heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.92 [0.67, 1.27] | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low |
Rosuvastatin vs placebo All‐cause mortality · chronic heart failure in Chagas cardiomyopathy patients Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 39 participants | Ungraded |
Rosuvastatin vs placebo Cardiac mortality at 30 days · chronic heart failure in Chagas cardiomyopathy patients Pharmacological interventions for treating heart failure in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 39 participants | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Cardiovascular mortality · people with hyperlipidaemia Chronotherapy versus conventional statins therapy for the treatment of hyperlipidaemia (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Intervention NR Cardiovacular morbidity · people with hyperlipidaemia Chronotherapy versus conventional statins therapy for the treatment of hyperlipidaemia (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Intervention NR At least 1 adverse event · people with hyperlipidaemia Chronotherapy versus conventional statins therapy for the treatment of hyperlipidaemia (2016) · Cochrane | OR 0.71 [0.44, 1.15] | 5 studies · 556 participants | Low |
Intervention NR Total Cholesterol (mg/dL) · people with hyperlipidaemia Chronotherapy versus conventional statins therapy for the treatment of hyperlipidaemia (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 514 participants | Low |
Intervention NR LDL‐C (mg/dL) · people with hyperlipidaemia Chronotherapy versus conventional statins therapy for the treatment of hyperlipidaemia (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 473 participants | Low |
Intervention NR HDL‐C (mg/dL) · people with hyperlipidaemia Chronotherapy versus conventional statins therapy for the treatment of hyperlipidaemia (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 514 participants | Low |
Intervention NR Triglycerides (mg/dL) · people with hyperlipidaemia Chronotherapy versus conventional statins therapy for the treatment of hyperlipidaemia (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 510 participants | Low |
Statin vs Placebo Mean pressure gradient (mmHg) Better indicated by lower scores. · patients with aortic valve stenosis Statins for aortic valve stenosis (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 1935 participants | Low |
Statin vs Placebo Valve area (cm2) Better indicated by higher scores. · patients with aortic valve stenosis Statins for aortic valve stenosis (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 127 participants | Low |
Statin vs Placebo Aortic jet velocity (m/s) · patients with aortic valve stenosis Statins for aortic valve stenosis (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 155 participants | Low |
Statin vs Placebo Freedom from valve replacement · patients with aortic valve stenosis Statins for aortic valve stenosis (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.93 [0.81, 1.06] | 4 studies · 2360 participants | Moderate |
Statin vs Placebo Death from cardiovascular cause · patients with aortic valve stenosis Statins for aortic valve stenosis (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.8 [0.56, 1.15] | 3 studies · 2297 participants | Low |
Statin vs Placebo Hospitalisation for any reason · patients with aortic valve stenosis Statins for aortic valve stenosis (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.84 [0.39, 1.84] | 1 study · 155 participants | Very low |
Statin vs Placebo Adverse events ‐ Muscle pain · patients with aortic valve stenosis Statins for aortic valve stenosis (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.91 [0.75, 1.09] | 3 studies · 2204 participants | Moderate |
Screening vs routine practice Number of new diagnoses: systematic screening vs routine practice · men and women 65 years of age or older Systematic screening for the detection of atrial fibrillation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 1.57 [1.08, 2.26] | 1 study · 9075 participants | Moderate |
Screening vs routine practice Number of new diagnoses: opportunistic screening vs routine practice · men and women 65 years of age or older Systematic screening for the detection of atrial fibrillation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 1.58 [1.1, 2.29] | 1 study · 9088 participants | Moderate |
Systematic screening vs opportunistic screening Number of new diagnoses · men and women 65 years of age or older Systematic screening for the detection of atrial fibrillation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 0.99 [0.72, 1.37] | 1 study · 9137 participants | Low |
Intervention NR Combined CVD death, non‐fatal MI, or non‐fatal stroke · patients in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease events Fibrates for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease events (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.84 [0.74, 0.96] | 6 studies · 16135 participants | Moderate |
Intervention NR Combined coronary heart disease death or non‐fatal MI · patients in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease events Fibrates for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease events (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.79 [0.68, 0.92] | 6 studies · 16135 participants | Moderate |
Intervention NR Overall mortality · patients in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease events Fibrates for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease events (2016) · Cochrane | RR 1.01 [0.81, 1.26] | 5 studies · 8471 participants | Low |
Intervention NR Non‐CVD mortality · patients in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease events Fibrates for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease events (2016) · Cochrane | RR 1.01 [0.76, 1.35] | 5 studies · 8471 participants | Low |
Intervention NR Discontinuation of therapy due to adverse effects · patients in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease events Fibrates for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease events (2016) · Cochrane | RR 1.38 [0.71, 2.68] | 3 studies · 4805 participants | Very low |
Systematic screening vs no/opportunistic screening All‐cause mortality · general population including those at moderate to high risk of CVD, mean age between 30 and 75 Systematic versus opportunistic risk assessment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.98 [0.93, 1.03] | 3 studies · 103571 participants | Low |
Systematic screening vs no/opportunistic screening Stroke (total) · general population including those at moderate to high risk of CVD, mean age between 30 and 75 Systematic versus opportunistic risk assessment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.99 [0.9, 1.1] | 2 studies · 79631 participants | Low |
Systematic screening vs no/opportunistic screening Coronary heart disease (total) · general population including those at moderate to high risk of CVD, mean age between 30 and 75 Systematic versus opportunistic risk assessment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (2016) · Cochrane | RR 1.01 [0.95, 1.07] | 4 studies · 110168 participants | Low |
Systematic screening vs no/opportunistic screening Total cholesterol, mmol/l · general population including those at moderate to high risk of CVD, mean age between 30 and 75 Systematic versus opportunistic risk assessment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 6 studies · 12591 participants | Very low |
Systematic screening vs no/opportunistic screening Systolic blood pressure, mmHg · general population including those at moderate to high risk of CVD, mean age between 30 and 75 Systematic versus opportunistic risk assessment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 6 studies · 12591 participants | Very low |
Systematic screening vs no/opportunistic screening Diastolic blood pressure, mmHg · general population including those at moderate to high risk of CVD, mean age between 30 and 75 Systematic versus opportunistic risk assessment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 6 studies · 12591 participants | Low |