Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28434088›Full record

ReviewCurrent heart failure reports2017

Addressing the Heterogeneity of Heart Failure in Future Randomized Trials.

Annamaria Iorio, Andrea Pozzi, Michele Senni

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current heart failure reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Introduction of a new scoring tool to identify clinically stable heart failure patients.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2022
    Article
  9. Consensus Transcriptional Landscape of Human End-Stage Heart Failure.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021
    Review
  10. Big Data Approaches in Heart Failure Research.Current heart failure reports · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Annamaria IorioPapa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy.
Andrea PozziPapa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy.
Michele SenniPapa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy. msenni@asst-pg23.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of the reviewThe aim of review is to describe the essential role of study designs beyond RCTs in contemporary contest of HF patients giving perspectives on its evolving. The article concludes with concern about the support of observational studies for future randomized clinical trials. RECENT

findingsWith the aging population and spectacular advance in cardiovascular therapy, the clinical syndrome comprising heart failure (HF) is increasingly in complexity of heterogeneity. It remains among the most challenging of clinical syndromes with a magnitude of proposed pathophysiological mechanisms involving the heart and the interplay with cardiac and non-cardiac comorbidities. In this epidemiological scenario, randomized clinical trials are suffering from growing failed treatment, so that a deeper understanding of heterogeneity represents a major unmet need. This field also is greatly in a more nuanced comprehension about the applicability in clinical practice of trials' results derived from well-selected HF population. Thus, we need to reflect on trials failures and the translation of previous trials in clinical practice in order to redirect the future trial intervention.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicHeart FailureHumansObservational Studies as TopicClinical trialsEpidemiologyHeart failureRegistry

Identifiers

PMID28434088

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.