Therapeutic futility and phenotypic heterogeneity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: what is the role of bionic learning?

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Decision-making for older adults with advanced heart disease: a framework for balancing benefit versus futility.European heart journal · 2026
   Review
2. The diagnosis and subclassification of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a review.Heart failure reviews · 2026
   Review
3. Racial and socioeconomic disparity associates with differences in cardiac DNA methylation among men with end-stage heart failure.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2021
   Article
4. Sex Differences Across the Lifespan: A Focus on Cardiometabolism.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2020
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Phenomapping of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction using machine learning-based unsupervised cluster analysis.2020

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as