1974
DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.49.3.390
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Major Changes Made by Criteria Committee of the New York Heart Association

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

1988
1988
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Severity of condition, risk, and criteria for intervention were measured by the following systems: Canadian Cardiovascular Society functional classification for angina related limitation on activities9; New York Heart Association scale10; Parsonnet 1 and 2 clinical risk scores for heart surgery11 12 (versions with and without the age correction (bias) were used for comparison); De Bono clinical priority criteria for cardiac catheterisation and PTCA13; and the New Zealand priority scores for urgency of CABG 56 The cardiologists and cardiac surgeons who developed and tested the New Zealand criteria agreed to accept a specific numerical threshold as indicative of reasonable levels of public service provision.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Severity of condition, risk, and criteria for intervention were measured by the following systems: Canadian Cardiovascular Society functional classification for angina related limitation on activities9; New York Heart Association scale10; Parsonnet 1 and 2 clinical risk scores for heart surgery11 12 (versions with and without the age correction (bias) were used for comparison); De Bono clinical priority criteria for cardiac catheterisation and PTCA13; and the New Zealand priority scores for urgency of CABG 56 The cardiologists and cardiac surgeons who developed and tested the New Zealand criteria agreed to accept a specific numerical threshold as indicative of reasonable levels of public service provision.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We measured severity of conditions, risk and criteria for intervention using the following criteria: Canadian Cardiovascular Society functional classification for angina related limitation on activities [12]; New York Heart Association scale [13]; Parsonnet 2 clinical risk score for heart surgery [14]; De Bono clinical priority criteria for cardiac catheterisation and coronary angioplasty [15]; and the New Zealand priority scores for urgency of CABG [16]. Indications for cardiological investigations and/or interventions were considered using the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) criteria [17,18].…”
Section: Data Collectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Anonymized, non‐invasive clinical data were collected retrospectively, including demographics, family history of HCM/SCD, extra‐cardiac manifestations of each RASopathy syndrome, syndrome, genetic analysis results, heart failure symptoms [New York Heart Association (NYHA)/Ross functional classification 22 , 23 ], medication, resting and ambulatory 12‐lead electrocardiogram, and two‐dimensional Doppler and colour transthoracic echocardiogram (from contemporaneously written reports). Age at diagnosis was defined as the age at which HCM was first diagnosed, which may have been prior to the patient(s) being seen for the first time in a paediatric cardiology service.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%