ReviewHeart failure reviews2022
Assessment of acute heart failure prognosis: the promising role of prognostic models and biomarkers.
Review in Heart failure reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Circulating Level of Growth-Differentiation Factor 15 and Mortality of Patients With Acute Heart Failure: A Meta-Analysis.Clinical cardiology · 2026Pooled it
- The Impact of Beta-Blocker Maintenance on Decompensated Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Current cardiology reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The Role of Diastolic Stress Echo and Myocardial Work in Early Detection of Cardiac Dysfunction in Women with Breast Cancer Undergoing Chemotherapy.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Critical Appraisal of Pharmaceutical Therapy in Diabetic Cardiomyopathy-Challenges and Prospectives.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Advanced Parameters of Myocardial Strain and Cardiac Biomarkers Indicate Subclinical Systolic Myocardial Dysfunction in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematous.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Diagnostic and prognostic value of plasma miR-106a-5p levels in patients with acute heart failure.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2024Article
- The Prognostic Role of Global Longitudinal Strain and NT-proBNP in Heart Failure Patients Receiving Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Nose-to-Heart Approach: Unveiling an Alternative Route of Acute Treatment.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Article
- Impact of the degree of worsening renal function and B-type natriuretic peptide on the prognosis of patients with acute heart failure.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- A Heart Failure Model Established by Pressure Overload Caused by Abdominal Aortic Contraction in Rat.Disease markers · 2022Article
- Development and validation of a clinical predictive model for 1-year prognosis in coronary heart disease patients combine with acute heart failure.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Numerous models and biomarkers have been proposed to estimate prognosis and improve decision-making in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). The present literature review provides a critical appraisal of externally validated prognostic models in AHF, combining clinical data and biomarkers. We perform a literature review of clinical studies, using the following terms: "acute heart failure," "acute decompensated heart failure," "prognostic models," "risk scores," "mortality," "death," "hospitalization," "admission," and "biomarkers." We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 1990 to 2020 for studies documenting prognostic models in AHF. External validation of each prognostic model to another AHF cohort, containing at least one biomarker, was prerequisites for study selection. Among 358 initially screened studies, 9 of them fulfilled all searching criteria. The majority of prognostic models were simplified, including a narrow number of variables (up to 10), with good performance regarding calibration and discrimination (c-statistics > 0.65). Unfortunately, the derived and validated cohorts showed a wide variety in patients' characteristics (e.g., cause of AHF and therapy). Moreover, the prognostic models used various time-points and a plethora of combinations of variables determining different cut-off values. Although the application of valid prognostic models in AHF population is quite promising, a precise methodological approach should be set for the derivation and validation of prognostic models in AHF with unified characteristics to establish an effective performance in clinical practice.
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.