ReviewCureus2025
Prognostic Utility of N-terminal Pro-B-type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) for Predicting Hospital Readmissions in Patients With Heart Failure: A Systematic Review of Clinical Evidence.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review examines the prognostic utility of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) for predicting hospital readmissions in patients with heart failure (HF). HF remains a leading cause of recurrent hospitalizations, contributing to increased morbidity and healthcare burden. While NT-proBNP is widely established for diagnosis and mortality prediction in HF, its role in forecasting hospital readmission risk-particularly at varying time frames-remains unclear. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) yielded 452 records, of which six studies met the inclusion criteria. These included one randomized controlled trial, one post hoc RCT analysis, and four observational or registry-based studies. The methodological quality was assessed using RoB 2.0, the NIH Quality Assessment Tool, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, revealing low to moderate risk of bias. The review found that isolated NT-proBNP values at admission showed limited predictive value, while serial measurements during hospitalization or within early post-discharge periods (e.g., 30-180 days) demonstrated stronger associations with readmission risk. Predictive variability was influenced by factors such as timing of measurement, renal function, age, and sex. Comparators, where present, varied across studies and included standard care or alternative biomarkers. Notably, current clinical guidelines lack standardized protocols for using NT-proBNP in readmission risk prediction, leading to inconsistent applications in practice. This review underscores the need for individualized interpretation and standardized measurement strategies to enhance NT-proBNP's utility in discharge planning and post-acute care of patients with HF.
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.