The entire field of cardiovascular medicine is witnessing an era of rapid scientific progress that occurs against a backdrop of increasing emphasis on the importance of evidence-based practice. In this context, there has been a rapid development of guidelines, scientific statements and position papers by major professional societies, such as the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association, the European Society of Cardiology and their numerous specialty divisions and working groups. A quick survey of 2016–2017 in the field of arrhythmias and related clinical entities, for example, reveals 10 such documents aimed at guiding clinicians in decision making.1–10 Explosive scientific developments and evolving, exciting, new clinical information necessitate fresh guidance. However, with such prolific production, it is a tall order to expect busy clinicians to notice, let alone read and embrace, all this continually emerging information, even in our interconnected digitised world.
It is time that learned societies, as well as editors of cardiology journals, undertake the task of guiding, standardising and coordinating these activities. This effort should prevent overproduction of overlapping documents and contribute towards the generation of user-friendly practical clinical tools that summarise evidence-based practice under the auspices of established organisations.