ArticleJAMA cardiology2020
Prognostic Models Derived in PARADIGM-HF and Validated in ATMOSPHERE and the Swedish Heart Failure Registry to Predict Mortality and Morbidity in Chronic Heart Failure.
Article in JAMA cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 47 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
47 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 98 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic models in populations with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Development and validation of a decision support tool for the diagnosis of acute heart failure: systematic review, meta-analysis, and modelling study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2022Pooled it
- Prognostic value of natriuretic peptides in heart failure: systematic review and meta-analysis.Heart failure reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Mortality risk in dilated cardiomyopathy: the accuracy of heart failure prognostic models and dilated cardiomyopathy-tailored prognostic model.ESC heart failure · 2020Pooled it
- SESC heart failure · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Prognostic value of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I in heart failure patients with mid-range and reduced ejection fraction.PloS one · 2021Trial
- CONFIDENT-HFpEF: a machine learning-based risk stratification for mortality and hospitalization using multimodal real-world data.ESC heart failure · 2026Observational
- Performance of the MAGGIC Score in Individuals with Heart Failure: Validation in a Brazilian Population.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2026Article
- Independent external validation of the LIFE-HF clinical prediction model using the GUIDE-IT trial.ESC heart failure · 2026Article
- Risk Stratification in Heart Failure: The Role of the MAGGIC Score in a Brazilian Population.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2026Article
- Natriuretic peptides testing and survival prediction models for chronic heart failure: a systematic review of added prognostic value.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2025Review
- The prognostic value of secreted frizzled-related protein 2 in elderly patients with heart failure: a single-center retrospective study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Prognostic Models in Heart Failure: Hope or Hype?Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Predicting Heart Failure Outcomes Using Patient-Reported Health Status: Real-World Validation of the KCCQ-12.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2025Article
- Prediction of recurrent heart failure hospitalizations and mortality using the echocardiographic Killip score.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2025Article
- Predicting survival in patients with severe heart failure: Risk score validation in the HELP-HF cohort.European journal of heart failure · 2025Observational
- Machine learning-based prediction model for 30-day readmission risk in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and heart failure: a retrospective cohort study with SHAP interpretability analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Prediction models and risk scores in different types of heart failure: a review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists improve outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes with and without heart failure.International journal of cardiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
18 authors at 11 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Accurate prediction of risk of death or hospitalizations in patients with heart failure (HF) may allow physicians to explore how more accurate decisions regarding appropriateness and timing of disease-modifying treatments, advanced therapies, or the need for end-of-life care can be made. Objective: To develop and validate a prognostic model for patients with HF. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multivariable analyses were performed in a stepwise fashion. Harrell C statistic was used to assess the discriminative ability. The derivation cohort was Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure trial (PARADIGM-HF) participants. The models were validated using the Aliskiren Trial to Minimize Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure Trial (ATMOSPHERE) study and in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF). A total of 8399 participants enrolled in PARADIGM-HF. Data were analyzed between June 2016 and June 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and the composite of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization at both 1 and 2 years. Results: Complete baseline clinical data were available for 8011 patients in PARADIGM-HF. The mean (SD) age of participants was 64 (11.4) years, 78.2% were men (n = 6567 of 8399), and 70.6% were New York Heart Association class II (n = 5919 of 8399). During a mean follow-up of 27 months, 1546 patients died, and 2031 had a cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. The common variables were: male sex, race/ethnicity (black or Asian), region (Central Europe or Latin America), HF duration of more than 5 years, New York Heart Association class III/ IV, left ventricular ejection fraction, diabetes mellitus, β-blocker use at baseline, and allocation to sacubitril/valsartan. Ranked by χ2, N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide was the single most powerful independent predictor of each outcome. The C statistic at 1 and 2 years was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.71-0.76) and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.70-0.73) for the primary composite end point, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.71-0.75) and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.73) for cardiovascular death, and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.74) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.67-0.74) for all-cause death, respectively. When validated in ATMOSPHERE, the C statistic at 1 and 2 years was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.72) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.68-0.71) for the primary composite end point, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.74) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.69-0.72) for cardiovascular death, and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.74) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.68-0.72) for all-cause death, respectively. An online calculator was created to allow calculation of an individual's risk (http://www.predict-hf.com). Conclusions and Relevance: Predictive models performed well and were developed and externally validated in large cohorts of geographically representative patients, comprehensively characterized with clinical and laboratory data including natriuretic peptides, who were receiving contemporary evidence-based treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.