ReviewIranian journal of public health2022
Readmission Risk Prediction Model for Patients with Chronic Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Iranian journal of public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting unplanned readmission within 30 days after discharge in patients with chronic heart failure.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Predicting unplanned readmissions in neurological patients: A large-scale AI-driven analysis using CHAID decision trees.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- AI-based approach for heart failure readmission prediction using SCG, ECG, and GSR signals.Physiological measurement · 2025Article
- Construction and evaluation of a 180-day readmission prediction model for chronic heart failure patients based on sCD40L.Medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical Predictive Modeling of Heart Failure: Domain Description, Models' Characteristics and Literature Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Charlson Comorbidity Index is correlated with all-cause readmission within six months in patients with heart failure: a retrospective cohort study in China.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to systematically evaluate a risk prediction model for the readmission of patients with CHF. Methods: The search was carried out in databases including PubMed, Embase, EBSCO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and also domestic databases including Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese Academic Journal Full Text Database, Wanfang Database, and Vipu Chinese Journal Service Platform. All the original studies published by July 2021. Two researchers identified previous studies involving readmission risk prediction models that met our selection criteria. The quality of the included studies was evaluated based on the CHARMS checklist, and the prediction models were systematically evaluated. Results: Of the overall 4787 studies retrieved, nine studies-two prospective, seven retrospective-met our selection criteria. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve exceeded 0.63 (0.63-0.80) for all the studies. The most common predictors in the model were B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) or N-terminal pro-brain BNP (Odds Ratio 4.35; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.53-7.49; Conclusion: The use of non-parametric statistical methods and assessment of large samples of electronic data improve the predictive abilities of the risk assessment models. It is necessary to calibrate and verify such models and promote the combined use of parametric and non-parametric methods to establish precise predictive models for clinical use.
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.