ArticleJACC. Advances2024
The HEARTRISK6 Scale: Predicting Short-Term Serious Outcomes in Emergency Department Acute Heart Failure Patients.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06664073 (The Predictive Value of the HEARTRISK6 Scale in Predicting Short-Term Serious Outcomes in Emergency Department Acute Heart Failure Patients), which is not on this 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.
The Predictive Value of the HEARTRISK6 Scale in Predicting Short-Term Serious Outcomes in Emergency Department Acute Heart Failure Patients
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Review
- Disposition Decisions: What Do You Need to Know to Triage Patients With Acute Heart Failure?JACC. Advances · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute heart failure (AHF) is a common emergency department (ED) presentation that may have poor outcomes but often does not require hospital admission. There is little evidence to guide dispositional decisions. Objectives: The authors sought to create a risk score for predicting short-term serious outcomes (SSO) in patients with AHF. Methods: We pooled data from 3 prospective cohorts: 2 published studies and 1 new cohort. The 3 cohorts prospectively enrolled patients who required treatment for AHF at 10 tertiary care hospital EDs. The primary outcome was SSO, defined as death <30 days, intubation or noninvasive ventilation (NIV), myocardial infarction, or relapse to ED <14 days. The logistic regression model evaluated 13 predictors, used an AIC-based step-down procedure, and bootstrapped internal validation. Results: Of the 2,246 patients in the 3 cohorts (N = 559; 1,100; 587), the mean age was 77.4 years, 54.5% were male, 3.1% received intravenous nitroglycerin, 5.2% received ED NIV, and 48.6% were admitted to the hospital. There were 281 (12.5%) SSOs including 70 deaths (3.1%) with many in discharged patients. The final HEARTRISK6 Scale included 6 variables: valvular heart disease, tachycardia, need for NIV, creatinine, troponin, and failed reassessment (walk test). Choosing HEARTRISK6 total-point admission thresholds of ≥1 or ≥2 would yield, respectively, sensitivities of 88.3% (95% CI: 83.9%-91.8%) and 71.5% (95% CI: 65.9%-76.7%) and specificities of 24.7% (95% CI: 22.8%-26.7%) and 50.1% (95% CI: 47.9%-52.4%) for SSO. Conclusions: Using 3 large prospectively collected datasets, we created a concise and sensitive risk scale for patients with AHF in the ED. Implementation of the HEARTRISK6 scale could lead to safer and more efficient disposition decisions.
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.