ArticleBMC geriatrics2025
Program theory and economic insights of a comprehensive geriatric assessment for frail heart failure patients.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo address frailty in chronic heart failure (HF) outpatients, we recently launched the Heart-Brain Clinic where we conduct comprehensive geriatric assessments (CGA). Its effectiveness has not yet been evaluated. The aim of this study is to explore how and why the CGA may impact quality of life and costs in selected HF outpatients.
methodsA mixed methods approach was used. First, we developed the program theory of the CGA by combining semi-structured interviews and literature, focusing on the ‘interventions’ and ’outcomes’ expected to result from the CGA. Second, we estimated the current costs of those expected outcomes to depict the room for improvement if all outcomes would be prevented. Costs were calculated with literature data and a prospective Dutch cohort study, adjusted for 2023 inflation.
resultsThe program theory indicated that recommended interventions were diverse, spanning both health and social domains. Stakeholders anticipated interventions addressing mood disorders, loneliness, and impaired mobility would most effectively improve quality of life and reduce healthcare costs, alleviating depressive symptoms and preventing falls. Improved quality of life and cost savings could also result from fewer acute HF events and less caregiver burden, with current per-patient yearly costs ranging from €1 111–2 111 for depressive symptoms, €289-3 266 for falls, and €4 048 − 6 940 for HF events.
conclusionsThe developed program theory identifies essential data to collect for evaluating the CGA’s (cost-) effectiveness. In addition, it shows the high current costs of outcomes that a CGA could impact, indicating room for improvement in costs.
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.