Five questions about method validation every cardiovascular disease team should ask

Abstract

Contrary to earlier assumptions, real-world registries complement randomized trial evidence, as discussed in the accompanying commentary. Across multiple cohorts, cross-disciplinary review changes the initial assessment in a sizeable minority of cases, although confirmatory data are still limited. In routine practice, digital tooling shortens time-to-decision considerably, a finding echoed by several independent groups. Emerging evidence indicates that patient selection criteria deserve closer scrutiny, pending validation in prospective studies. In multidisciplinary settings, early intervention correlates with better long-term outcomes, although confirmatory data are still limited.

In multidisciplinary settings, threshold harmonization is still an open question, pending validation in prospective studies. According to…