Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28785464›Full record

ArticleCardiac failure review2016

Ali Vazir, Kostantinos Bronis, Simon Pearse

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiac failure review, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Foreword.Cardiac failure review · 2017
    Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ali VazirRoyal Brompton Hospital, National Heart and Lung Institute,Imperial College London, London, UK.
Kostantinos BronisRoyal Brompton Hospital, National Heart and Lung Institute,Imperial College London, London, UK.
Simon PearseRoyal Brompton Hospital, National Heart and Lung Institute,Imperial College London, London, UK.
Royal Brompton Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Central sleep apnoea (CSA) is common in patients with heart failure (HF), with a prevalence of 20-45 %. It is a marker of severity of HF and is independently associated with increased morbidity and mortality rates in patients with HF. Targeting CSA with adaptive servoventilation (ASV) was postulated to improve outcomes; however, the results of the recent SERVE-HF (Treatment of Sleep-disordered Breathing by Adaptive Servo-ventilation in Heart Failure Patients) trial showed that in patients with CSA and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), ASV, despite successfully treating CSA, was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular death compared with medical therapy. In this expert opinion we discuss the controversies of treating CSA in HFrEF following the SERVE-HF study.

Indexed as

adaptive servo-ventilationCentral sleep apnoeaheart failure

Identifiers

PMID28785464
PMCPMC5490971
OpenAlexW2523421211

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.