ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2025
Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in the Prognostic Assessment of Heart Failure: From a Standardized Approach to Tailored Therapeutic Strategies.
Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Baseline peak VO₂ and treatment effect consistency of perioperative rehabilitation in cardiac valve surgery: an exploratory subgroup analysis of the PORT trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Trial
- Time-Course of Physiological Adaptations to High-Intensity Interval Training-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation After Myocardial Infarction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Resting and Exercise Lactate Dynamics in Heart Failure: Guiding Therapeutic Optimization.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Physical Frailty Versus the MECKI Score in Risk Stratification of Patients with Advanced Heart Failure: Simpler Measure, Similar Insights?Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Integrated heart rate and oxygen uptake recovery phenotypes reveal heterogeneous recovery patterns in coronary artery disease.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing (CPET) is the gold standard for the functional assessment in patients with heart failure (HF), providing objective parameters that reflect the integrated response of the cardiovascular, respiratory, and muscular systems, in addition several CPET-derived variables have shown independent prognostic value in patients with both reduced (HFrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) HF. This review aims to critically analyze the main CPET prognostic variables in heart failure, highlighting their underlying pathophysiological mechanisms, their predictive capacity for mortality and hospitalizations, and their integration into clinical decision-making models. Parameters such as peak oxygen uptake (VO
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.