ArticleBMJ open2025
Assessment of regional variation in the management of heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction between the Russian Federation and the European Union: the results of the international survey.
Article in BMJ open, 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesRegional differences in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) care have been reported. We aimed to assess a physician-reported HFpEF management in the Russian Federation (RF) and a variation in the diagnosis and treatment of HFpEF between the RF and the European Union (EU). DESIGN/SETTINGS: It is a post hoc analysis of an academic web-based international HFpEF designed as a cross-sectional survey and conducted between May 2023 and July 2023.
participantsMedical doctors who work in the fields of cardiology and general medicine.
resultsAmong 1460 medical doctors who completed the study were 166 Russian and 646 European specialists. The responders were comparable across the groups in most of the baseline characteristics, except that RF specialists were less likely to be heart failure specialists (RF: 2% vs EU: 26%) and less often worked in academic environments (RF: 17% vs EU: 61%). The utilisation of specific echocardiography parameters (RF: 66% vs EU: 80%) and natriuretic peptides (RF: 83% vs EU: 91%) to establish a diagnosis of HFpEF was less frequent in RF compared with EU, while HFpEF scores were more likely to be used by Russian physicians (RF: 58% vs EU: 40%). In the settings when all HF medications are available, responders of both regions prioritised sodium-glucose co-transporter type 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) (mean rank: RF: 2.6 (IQR: 2.3-3) vs EU: 2.3 (IQR: 2.2-2.5)), followed by diuretics in the EU and ACE inhibitors in the RF. Every second responder in both regions preferred SGLT-2is if only one drug was available (RF: 57% vs EU 51%).
conclusionsThe results reveal discrepancies in physician-reported HFpEF management between RF and EU responders, particularly in the diagnostic workup. Although the utilisation of relevant diagnostic tests was lower in the RF compared with the EU, these were used by two-thirds of Russian respondents. Nevertheless, further measures are required to improve the care of HFpEF patients in the RF.
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.