ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting survival in patients with cardiogenic shock.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: There is currently a lack of easy-to-use tools for assessing the severity of cardiogenic shock (CS) patients. This study aims to develop a nomogram for evaluating severity in CS patients regardless of the underlying cause. Methods and results: The MIMIC-IV database was used to identify 1,923 CS patients admitted to the ICU. A multivariate Cox model was developed in the training cohort (70%) based on LASSO regression results. Factors such as age, systolic blood pressure, arterial oxygen saturation, hemoglobin, serum creatinine, blood glucose, arterial pH, arterial lactate, and norepinephrine use were incorporated into the final model. This model was visualized as a Cardiogenic Shock Survival Nomogram (CSSN) to predict 30-day survival rates. The model's c-statistic was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.73-0.77) in the training cohort and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.70-0.77) in the validation cohort, demonstrating good predictive accuracy. The AUC of the CSSN for 30-day survival probabilities was 0.76 in the training cohort and 0.73 in the validation cohort. Calibration plots showed strong concordance between predicted and actual survival rates, and decision curve analysis (DCA) affirmed the model's clinical utility. The CSSN outperformed the Cardiogenic Shock Score (CSS) in various metrics, including c-statistic, time-dependent ROC, calibration plots, and DCA (c-statistic: 0.75 vs. 0.72; AUC: 0.76 vs. 0.73, Conclusions: The CSSN was developed to predict 30-day survival rates in CS patients irrespective of the underlying cause, showing good performance and potential clinical utility in managing CS.
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.