ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2026
PIFA-N Multifactor Model to Predict Adverse Outcomes for Chronic Heart Failure Patients.
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.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.