ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2022
Clinical Utility and Validation of the Krakow DCM Risk Score-A Prognostic Model Dedicated to Dilated Cardiomyopathy.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic value of 9 immune-inflammatory markers for patients with dilated cardiomyopathy: A retrospective study.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2026Article
- Predicting adverse outcomes in dilated cardiomyopathy using 3D echocardiography: penalised Cox regression versus machine learning.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Cardiac Disease: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Outcomes.Journal of personalized 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
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOne of the most common causes of heart failure is dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). In DCM, the mortality risk is high and reaches approximately 20% in 5 years. A patient's prognosis should be established for appropriate HF management. However, so far, no validated tools have been available for the DCM population.
methodsThe study population consisted of 735 DCM patients: 406 from the derivation cohort (previously described) and 329 from the validation cohort (from 2009 to 2020, with outcome data after a mean of 42 months). For each DCM patient, the individual mortality risk was calculated based on the Krakow DCM Risk Score.
resultsDuring follow-up, 49 (15%) patients of the validation cohort died. They had shown significantly higher calculated 1-to-5-year mortality risks. The Krakow DCM Risk Score yielded good discrimination in terms of overall mortality risk, with an AUC of 0.704-0.765. Based on a 2-year mortality risk, patients were divided into non-high (≤6%) and high (>6%) mortality risk groups. The observed mortality rates were 8.3% (
conclusionsThe Krakow DCM Risk Score was found to have good predictive accuracy. The 2-year mortality risk > 6% has good discrimination for the identification of high-risk patients and can be applied in everyday 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.