ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2010
Use of multiple biomarkers in heart failure.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancements in Biomarkers for Early Detection and Risk Stratification of Cardiovascular Diseases-A Literature Review.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Cardiac ScoreCard: A Diagnostic Multivariate Index Assay System for Predicting a Spectrum of Cardiovascular Disease.Expert systems with applications · 2016Article
- The Current and Potential Clinical Relevance of Heart Failure Biomarkers.Current heart failure reports · 2015Review
- Charting a roadmap for heart failure biomarker studies.JACC. Heart failure · 2014Review
- Red cell distribution width predicts short- and long-term outcomes of acute congestive heart failure more effectively than hemoglobin.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2014Article
- Novel biomarkers in chronic heart failure.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2012Review
- Classification of heart failure in the atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) study: a comparison of diagnostic criteria.Circulation. Heart failure · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biomarkers are becoming increasingly available for clinical use, particularly in the care of patients with heart failure. For health care providers, a major difficulty is how to interpret and apply these increasing amounts of diagnostic and prognostic information. Consequently, the scientific challenge is evolving from the discovery of biomarkers to the selection and validation of select panels of clinically useful markers that balance performance and practicality. Optimal combinations of biomarkers will vary based on the intended use (eg, diagnosis vs prognosis). The final goal must be to generate more actionable knowledge that improves patient management and outcomes, rather than merely creating greater complexity. Here we conceptually define multiple biomarker strategies, provide examples of emerging biomarker panels used in the care of patients with heart failure, and address key statistical and clinical issues for this rapidly evolving field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20424966What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.