ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2023
A risk model for decline in health status after acute myocardial infarction among older adults.
Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Healing at Home: Receipt of Home Health Care and Patient-Centered Outcomes Among Older Adults After Acute Myocardial Infarction.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2026Article
- Construction of a predictive model for in-hospital mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated with cardiogenic shock.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealth status is increasingly recognized as an important patient-centered outcome after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Yet drivers of decline in health status after AMI remain largely unknown in older adults. We sought to develop and validate a predictive risk model for health status decline among older adult survivors of AMI.
methodsUsing data from a prospective cohort study conducted from 2013 to 2017 of 3041 patients age ≥75 years hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction at 94 U.S. hospitals, we examined a broad array of demographic, clinical, functional, and psychosocial variables for their association with health status decline, defined as a decrease of ≥5 points in the Short Form-12 (SF-12) physical component score from hospitalization to 6 months post-discharge. Model selection was performed in logistic regression models of 20 imputed datasets to yield a parsimonious risk prediction model. Model discrimination and calibration were evaluated using c-statistics and calibration plots, respectively.
resultsOf the 2571 participants included in the main analyses, 30% of patients experienced health status decline from hospitalization to 6 months post-discharge. The risk model contained 14 factors, 10 associated with higher risk of health status decline (age, pre-existing AMI, pre-existing cancer, pre-existing COPD, pre-existing diabetes, history of falls, presenting Killip class, acute kidney injury, baseline health status, and mobility impairment) and four associated with lower risk of health status decline (male sex, higher hemoglobin, receipt of revascularization, and arrhythmia during hospitalization). The model displayed good discrimination (c-statistic = 0.74 in validation cohort) and calibration (p > 0.05) in both development and validation cohorts.
conclusionsWe used split sampling to develop and validate a risk model for health status decline in older adults after hospitalization for AMI and identified several risk factors that may be modifiable to mitigate the threat of this important patient-centered outcome. External validation of this risk model is warranted.
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.