SynthesisCurrent pharmaceutical design2023
Risk Prediction Models and Novel Prognostic Factors for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Systematic and Comprehensive Review.
Synthesis in Current pharmaceutical design, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in heart failure and myeloproliferative neoplasms: clinical applications and risk scores - a narrative review.Cardio-oncology (London, England) · 2026Review
- CHAFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have large individual differences, unclear risk stratification, and imperfect treatment plans. Risk prediction models are helpful for the dynamic assessment of patients' prognostic risk and early intensive therapy of high-risk patients. The purpose of this study is to systematically summarize the existing risk prediction models and novel prognostic factors for HFpEF, to provide a reference for the construction of convenient and efficient HFpEF risk prediction models.
methodsStudies on risk prediction models and prognostic factors for HFpEF were systematically searched in relevant databases including PubMed and Embase. The retrieval time was from inception to February 1, 2023. The Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool was used to assess the risk of bias in included studies. The predictive value of risk prediction models for end outcomes was evaluated by sensitivity, specificity, the area under the curve, C-statistic, C-index, etc. In the literature screening process, potential novel prognostic factors with high value were explored.
resultsA total of 21 eligible HFpEF risk prediction models and 22 relevant studies were included. Except for 2 studies with a high risk of bias and 2 studies with a moderate risk of bias, other studies that proposed risk prediction models had a low risk of bias overall. Potential novel prognostic factors for HFpEF were classified and described in terms of demographic characteristics (age, sex, and race), lifestyle (physical activity, body mass index, weight change, and smoking history), laboratory tests (biomarkers), physical inspection (blood pressure, electrocardiogram, imaging examination), and comorbidities.
conclusionIt is of great significance to explore the potential novel prognostic factors of HFpEF and build a more convenient and efficient risk prediction model for improving the overall prognosis of patients. This review can provide a substantial reference for further research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.