Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
9
pubmed:dateCreated
2001-2-15
pubmed:abstractText
Ratings by an expert panel of the appropriateness of treatments may offer better guidance for clinical practice than the variable decisions of individual clinicians, yet there have been no prospective studies of clinical outcomes. We compared the clinical outcomes of patients treated medically after angiography with those of patients who underwent revascularization, within groups defined by ratings of the degree of appropriateness of revascularization in varying clinical circumstances.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
AIM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Mar
pubmed:issn
0028-4793
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:day
1
pubmed:volume
344
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
645-54
pubmed:dateRevised
2010-11-18
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2001
pubmed:articleTitle
Underuse of coronary revascularization procedures in patients considered appropriate candidates for revascularization.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Research and Development, Kensington & Chelsea and Westminster Health Authority, London, United Kingdom. harry.hemingway@ha.kcw-ha.nthames.nhs.uk
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't