Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42016340›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2026

PIFA-N Multifactor Model to Predict Adverse Outcomes for Chronic Heart Failure Patients.

Natalia A Dragomiretskaya, Anastasia V Tolmacheva, Aida I Tarzimanova, Anna E Pokrovskaya, Tatiana S Vargina, Tatiana A Safronova, Ivan D Medvedev, Antonina A Abramova, Daria D Vanina, Valery I Podzolkov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Natalia A DragomiretskayaDepartment of Internal Medicine No. 2, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenovskiy University), Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6531-6255
Anastasia V TolmachevaDepartment of Internal Medicine No. 2, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenovskiy University), Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6319-4162
Aida I TarzimanovaDepartment of Internal Medicine No. 2, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenovskiy University), Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9536-8307
Anna E PokrovskayaDepartment of Internal Medicine No. 2, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenovskiy University), Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8875-9032
Tatiana S VarginaDepartment of Internal Medicine No. 2, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenovskiy University), Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3076-4231
Tatiana A SafronovaDepartment of Internal Medicine No. 2, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenovskiy University), Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2647-5640
Ivan D MedvedevDepartment of Internal Medicine No. 2, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenovskiy University), Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4210-2841
Antonina A AbramovaDepartment of Internal Medicine No. 2, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenovskiy University), Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3311-6072
Daria D VaninaDepartment of Internal Medicine No. 2, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenovskiy University), Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1959-370X
Valery I PodzolkovDepartment of Internal Medicine No. 2, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenovskiy University), Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0758-5609

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In recent years, special attention has been given to developing multifactor models that support a more personal approach to assessing prognosis for chronic heart failure (CHF) patients with varying degrees of systolic dysfunction. The existing scales, namely the Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM), Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic HF (MAGGIC-HF), PARADIGM Risk of Events and Death in the Contemporary Treatment (PREDICT-HF), and the Barcelona Bio-HF (BCN-Bio-HF) risk calculator, contain numerous variables and biomarkers not readily accessible in actual clinical practice and thus fall short of meeting physicians' requirements. The study aimed to develop a multifactor model for assessing the risk of comorbid CHF patients developing adverse outcomes. Methods: Our study included 233 patients (129 male and 104 female) aged 73.2 ± 12.4 years, admitted to the Internal Medicine Clinic of the Sechenov University Clinical Hospital No. 4 with symptoms of New York Heart Association Functional Classification (NYHA FC) II to IV CHF, including 91 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (CHFpEF), 69 with heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (CHFmrEF), and 63 with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (CHFrEF). All the patients had given their informed and written consent to take part in the study. They were given a standard clinical examination and additionally tested for N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), soluble interleukin-like protein receptor (sST2), galectin-3, hepcidin, and copeptin levels. Prospective follow-up lasted for 36 ± 3 months. The primary endpoint was defined as death from all causes. The findings were processed statistically using Statistica 12.0 and SPSS software. Results: All-cause mortality was 33.1% in the cohort examined. We used uni- and multivariate regression analysis to develop a PIFA-N prognostic mathematical model of adverse outcome that factored in community-acquired pneumonia diagnosed on inclusion in the study (odds ratio (OR): 3.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-8.5, P = 0.028), a previous myocardial infarction (OR: 4.26, 95% CI 1.54-11.7, P = 0.005), presence of any form of atrial fibrillation (OR: 3.13, 95% CI 1.05-9.2, P = 0.039) and/or anemia (OR: 3.18, 95% CI 1.003-10.1, P = 0.049), and NT-proBNP level (OR: 1.0005, 95% CI 1.0002-1.0008, P = 0.002). Other biomarkers studied showed no predictive value. Our PIFA-N model is 77.1% sensitive and 77.3% specific (area under receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC AUC) 0.845), which meets high efficiency criteria. Conclusion: We analyzed CHF patients' 3-year survival rate to develop an efficient prognostic model for assessing the risk of lethal outcome, whose arguments are easy-to-check conditions and routine laboratory test figures that can be established without any sophisticated examination techniques.

Indexed as

Chronic heart failureMultifactor prognostic modelNT-proBNPPrognostic factors

Identifiers

PMID42016340
PMCPMC13094181

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.