On-demand — Treatment adherence for cardiovascular disease teams

About this Webinar

Emerging evidence indicates that standardized reporting improves comparability between centers, pending validation in prospective studies. Emerging evidence indicates that threshold harmonization is still an open question, with meaningful differences between subgroups. Longitudinal data show that real-world registries complement randomized trial evidence, and this trend is expected to continue. Across multiple cohorts, integrating quantitative measures reduces subjective bias, which has direct implications for daily practice. Longitudinal data show that threshold harmonization is still an open question, and this trend is expected to continue.

According to consensus recommendations, training and accreditation are decisive for reproducibility, with meaningful differences between subgroups. According to consensus recommendations, cross-disciplinary review changes the initial assessment in a sizeable minority of cases, which has direct implications for daily practice. Longitudinal data show that training and accreditation are decisive for reproducibility, as discussed in the accompanying commentary. Across multiple cohorts, patient selection criteria deserve closer scrutiny, which has direct implications for daily practice.