Observational studyCardiology journal2026
The differences between ambulatory and hospitalized heart failure patients who have mildly reduced or preserved ejection fractions: lessons learned from the HF-POL study.
Observational study in Cardiology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence as the missing integrator in heart failure care - from remote monitoring to personalized therapy.Cardiology journal · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHeart failure (HF) is a leading cause of hospitalization and mortality, regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). The prevalence of HF with preserved and mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFpEF and HFmrEF) is rising, along with increasing hospitalizations. Patients with HF exhibit varied clinical presentations and therapeutic needs, which depend on HF status rather than solely on LVEF. The study aimed to compare the general characteristics, clinical presentation, and diagnostic features of ambulatory and hospitalized (HOSPs) patients enrolled in the HF-POL study.
methodsHF-POL was a multicenter observational study in 14 Polish clinical centers, enrolling adult patients with HF and LVEF > 40%, either hospitalized for HF decompensation or under ambulatory care. Data collected included demographics, comorbidities, medications, physical exams, echocardiography, and additional diagnostics.
resultsAmong the 1497 patients, 52.5% were men, with a mean age of 75 years and an LVEF of 50%. HOSPs (63.4%) were older, more likely to be women, and more frequently had a new HF diagnosis compared to ambulatory (36.6%). HOSPs had fewer previous HF hospitalizations and lower rates of coronary artery disease and prior myocardial infarction. However, they had higher rates of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, and depression. HOSPs were more often treated with beta blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, calcium blockers, nitrates, amiodarone, and digoxin, but less often with sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors.
conclusionsThe HF-POL registry highlighted important differences between hospitalized and ambulatory HF patients, underscoring the need for individualized management, particularly during transitions from hospital to ambulatory care.
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.