ArticleESC heart failure2021
Risk factors and prediction models for incident heart failure with reduced and preserved ejection fraction.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Risk prediction models for detecting a new diagnosis of heart failure within 5 years in the community: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2026Pooled it
- An Evidence Map of the Women Veterans' Health Literature, 2016 to 2023: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
- Alcohol Intake and Incidence of Heart Failure and Its Subtypes: VA Million Veteran Program.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Leveraging calcium score CT radiomics for heart failure risk prediction.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Cell senescence in cardiometabolic diseases.npj aging · 2024Review
- Article
- Article
- A year in heart failure: updates of clinical and preclinical findings.ESC heart failure · 2023Review
- Functional and Metabolic Imaging in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: Promises, Challenges, and Clinical Utility.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2023Review
- Genetic architecture of heart failure with preserved versus reduced ejection fraction.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Arrhythmic Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: Mechanisms, Genetics, and Future Directions.CJC open · 2022Review
- Novel biomarkers of inflammation in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: analysis from a large prospective cohort study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2022Article
- Risk factors and prediction models for incident heart failure with reduced and preserved ejection fraction.ESC heart failure · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThis study aims to develop the first race-specific and sex-specific risk prediction models for heart failure with preserved (HFpEF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND
resultsWe created a cohort of 1.8 million individuals who had an outpatient clinic visit between 2002 and 2007 within the Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System and obtained information on HFpEF, HFrEF, and several risk factors from electronic health records (EHR). Variables were selected for the risk prediction models in a 'derivation cohort' that consisted of individuals with baseline date in 2002, 2003, or 2004 using a forward stepwise selection based on a change in C-index threshold. Discrimination and calibration were assessed in the remaining participants (internal 'validation cohort'). A total of 66 831 individuals developed HFpEF, and 92 233 developed HFrEF (52 679 and 71 463 in the derivation cohort) over a median of 11.1 years of follow-up. The HFpEF risk prediction model included age, diabetes, BMI, COPD, previous MI, antihypertensive treatment, SBP, smoking status, atrial fibrillation, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), while the HFrEF model additionally included previous CAD. For the HFpEF model, C-indices were 0.74 (SE = 0.002) for white men, 0.76 (0.005) for black men, 0.79 (0.015) for white women, and 0.77 (0.026) for black women, compared with 0.72 (0.002), 0.72 (0.004), 0.77 (0.017), and 0.75 (0.028), respectively, for the HFrEF model. These risk prediction models were generally well calibrated in each race-specific and sex-specific stratum of the validation cohort.
conclusionsOur race-specific and sex-specific risk prediction models, which used easily obtainable clinical variables, can be a useful tool to implement preventive strategies or subtype-specific prevention trials in the nine million users of the VA healthcare system and the general population after external validation.
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.