ReviewCirculation. Heart failure2024
Generalizable Approach to Quantifying Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy.
Review in Circulation. Heart failure, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonist Therapy in Heart Failure Through Integrated Care Strategies.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Assessment of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy Optimization Scores and Readmission Risk in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.The Annals of pharmacotherapy · 2026Article
- Remote digital intervention targeting heart failure medical therapy: a randomized controlled trial.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Extent and predictors of guideline-directed medical therapy optimization during cardiac rehabilitation in patients with heart failure.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2026Article
- Association of an Algorithm-Generated Medication Optimization Score With Clinical Outcomes in Ambulatory Patients With Heart Failure.Pharmacotherapy · 2026Article
- Early initiation of guideline-directed medical therapy in patients with cardiogenic shock supported with ImpellaBMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- Social Determinants of Health and Disparities in Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy Optimization for Heart Failure.Circulation. Heart failure · 2025Article
- Pharmacist Medication Titration Program for Patients With Cardiac Sarcoidosis and Systolic Heart Failure: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundQuantifying guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) intensity is foundational for improving heart failure (HF) care. Existing measures discount dose intensity or use inconsistent weighting.
methodsThe Kansas City Medical Optimization (KCMO) score is the average of total daily to target dose percentages for eligible GDMT, reflecting the percentage of optimal GDMT prescribed (range, 0-100). In Change the Management of Patients With HF, we computed KCMO, HF collaboratory (0-7), and modified HF Collaboratory (0-100) scores for each patient at baseline and for 1-year change in established GDMT at the time (mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, β-blocker, ACE [angiotensin-converting enzyme] inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor). We compared baseline and 1-year change distributions and the coefficient of variation (SD/mean) across scores.
resultsAmong 4532 patients at baseline, mean KCMO, HF collaboratory, and modified HF Collaboratory scores were 38.8 (SD, 25.7), 3.4 (1.7), and 42.2 (22.2), respectively. The mean 1-year change (n=4061) for KCMO was -1.94 (17.8); HF collaborator, -0.11 (1.32); and modified HF Collaboratory, -1.35 (19.8). KCMO had the highest coefficient of variation (0.66), indicating greater variability around the mean than the HF collaboratory (0.49) and modified HF Collaboratory (0.53) scores, reflecting higher resolution of the variability in GDMT intensity across patients.
conclusionsKCMO measures GDMT intensity by incorporating dosing and treatment eligibility, provides more granularity than existing methods, is easily interpretable (percentage of ideal GDMT), and can be adapted as performance measures evolve. Further study of its association with outcomes and its usefulness for quality assessment and improvement is needed.
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.