Evidence mapPaperPMID 36284167Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Data-driven identification of heart failure disease states and progression pathways using electronic health records.

Tasha Nagamine, Brian Gillette, John Kahoun, Rolf Burghaus, Jörg Lippert, Mayur Saxena

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Data-driven decision making in patient management: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Robust extraction of pneumonia-associated clinical states from electronic health records.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

6 authors.

Tasha NagamineDroice Research, New York, NY, USA.
Brian GilletteDepartment of Surgery, NYU Langone Long Island, Mineola, NY, USA.
John KahounDroice Research, New York, NY, USA.
Rolf BurghausBayer AG, Wuppertal, Germany.
Jörg LippertBayer AG, Wuppertal, Germany.
Mayur SaxenaDroice Research, New York, NY, USA. mayur@droicelabs.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of morbidity, healthcare costs, and mortality. Guideline based segmentation of HF into distinct subtypes is coarse and unlikely to reflect the heterogeneity of etiologies and disease trajectories of patients. While analyses of electronic health records show promise in expanding our understanding of complex syndromes like HF in an evidence-driven way, limitations in data quality have presented challenges for large-scale EHR-based insight generation and decision-making. We present a hypothesis-free approach to generating real-world characteristics and progression patterns of HF. Patient disease state snapshots are extracted from the complaints mentioned in unstructured clinical notes. Typical disease states are generated by clustering and characterized in terms of their distinguishing features, temporal relationships, and risk of important clinical events. Our analysis generates a comprehensive "disease phenome" of real-world patients computed from large, noisy, secondary-use EHR datasets created in a routine clinical setting.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsHeart FailureHumansSyndrome

Identifiers

PMID36284167
PMCPMC9596465

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.