SynthesisHeart failure reviews2024
Comparative analysis of treatment options for chronic heart failure and depression: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Heart failure reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Face-to-Face and Internet-based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Patients with Heart Failure: an Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.Current heart failure reports · 2026Pooled it
- The evaluation of depression prevalence and its association with obesity phenotypes in a community-dwelling aged population.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Different interventions have been evaluated for the treatment of depression in heart failure (HF) patients. However, clear and established recommendations are lacking. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the effect of various treatment options on depression scores in heart failure patients. The primary outcome was a change in depression scores presented as standardized mean difference (SMD). A Bayesian network for meta-analysis was constructed. Twenty-five RCTs were included, randomizing 6014 patients with confirmed heart failure and depression between 2003 and 2022. Compared to treatment as usual (TAU), only cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) (SMD - 0.60, CI95% [- 1.0, - 0.17]) leads to a significant reduction in depression scores. Other interventions did not improve depression scores significantly. Our results show that for patients with HF and depression, CBT can significantly improve measures of depression, being the most efficacious treatment.
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.