Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 324

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Geographic Variation in the Treatment of Acute Myocardial Infarction: The Cooperative Cardiovascular Project

O'Connor, Gerald T., Quinton, Hebe B., Traven, Neal D., Ramunno, Lawrence D., Dodds, T. Andrew, Marciniak, Thomas A., Wennberg, John E.·1999·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Quality indicators for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction include pharmacologic therapy, reperfusion, and smoking cessation advice, but these therapies may not be administered to all patients who could benefit from them. OBJECTIVE: To assess geographic variation in adherence to quality indicators for treatment of acute myocardial infarction. DESIGN: Inception cohort using data from the Health Care Financing Administration Cooperative Cardiovascular Project. SETTING: Acute care hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: A total of 186800 Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for treatment of confirmed acute myocardial infarction from February 1994 through July 1995. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adherence to quality indicators for pharmacologic therapy, reperfusion, and smoking cessation advice for patients judged to be ideal candidates for these therapies. The mean rates of adherence to these quality indicators for the entire United States were determined, and the 20th and 80th percentiles of the age- and sex-adjusted rates for each of 306 hospital referral regions were contrasted (mean rate [20th-80th percentiles]). RESULTS: Aspirin was used frequently both during hospitalization (86.2% [82.6%-90.1%]) and at discharge (77.8% [72.5% -83.9%]). Calcium channel blockers were withheld from most patients with impaired left ventricular function (81.9% [73.6%-90.8%]). Lower rates were seen in the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors at discharge (59.3% [49.2%-69.2%]); reperfusion, using thrombolytic therapy or coronary angioplasty (67.2% [59.8%-75.1%]); prescription of beta-blockers at discharge (49.5% [35.8%-61.5%]); and for smoking cessation advice (41.9% [32.8%-51.3%]). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial geographic variation exists in the treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction, and these gaps between knowledge and practice have important consequences. Therapies with proven benefit for AMI are underused despite strong evidence that their use will result in better patient outcomes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.281.7.627

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 324

Metadata

Authors
O'Connor, G. T., Quinton, H. B., Traven, N. D., Ramunno, L. D., Dodds, T. A., Marciniak, T. A., & Wennberg, J. E.
Venue
JAMA
Published
1999-02-17
Volume
281
Issue
7
Pages
627
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2116025239
Cited by
324
References
3
FWCI
16.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Geographic Variation in the Treatment of Acute Myocardial Infarction: The Cooperative Cardiovascular Project. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.281.7.627
The paper
O'Connor, G. T., Quinton, H. B., Traven, N. D., Ramunno, L. D., Dodds, T. A., Marciniak, T. A., & Wennberg, J. E. (1999). Geographic Variation in the Treatment of Acute Myocardial Infarction: The Cooperative Cardiovascular Project. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.281.7.627

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.