ReviewCardiac failure review2025
History of Heart Failure Definition.
Review in Cardiac failure review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inflammatory Phenotypes and Biomarker Trajectories During Hospitalization for Acute Heart Failure.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Hyperuricemia Reflects Cardiometabolic Burden Rather than Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction Across Heart Failure Phenotypes: Insights from a Real-World Acute Heart Failure Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Polycythemia Vera, Thrombophilia, CTEPH, Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis and Vertebral Artery Occlusion: A Case-Illustrated Narrative Review of Competing Thrombotic and Hemorrhagic Risks.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- MicroRNAs in Heart Failure Pathogenesis and Progression: Mechanistic Control, Biomarker Potential, and Translational Perspectives.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A Contemporary Perspective on Acute Decompensated Heart Failure Classification: A State-of-the-art Review from an International Expert Group.Cardiac failure review · 2026Review
- Finding and Managing Heart Failure Earlier: Why Enhancing Primary Care Teams to Apply More Definitive Surveillance is the Solution.Cardiac failure review · 2026Review
- Systolic, Diastolic. Is Anyone Worse?Maedica · 2025Article
- Paradoxical Use of Benralizumab in Reactive Hypereosinophilia from Toxocariasis and Tuberculosis Co-Infection-Case Report and Literature Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Prognostic Models in Heart Failure: Hope or Hype?Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The concept of heart failure (HF) has undergone significant transformation from ancient times to the present, evolving from rudimentary understandings to a complex clinical syndrome. Early descriptions by Egyptian, Greek and Roman physicians laid the groundwork for understanding cardiac dysfunction. The Renaissance period brought crucial insights with Harvey's discovery of blood circulation. In the 20th century, the Framingham Heart Study provided a pivotal shift, formally defining HF as a clinical syndrome with diagnostic criteria. Over the decades, definitions of HF have evolved, integrating advancements in pathophysiology, biomarkers and imaging techniques. Initially focused on symptomatic and clinical presentations, modern definitions emphasise underlying structural and functional cardiac abnormalities. This evolution reflects the growing complexity and precision of diagnosing and managing HF. A historical perspective underscores the progressive refinement in HF definitions, which enhances diagnostic precision and therapeutic strategies, ultimately improving patient outcomes. Understanding this evolution is crucial for appreciating contemporary HF management and anticipating future advances.
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.