ArticleActa Cardiologica Sinica2026
Prognostic Significance of Estimated Plasma Volume Status in Patients with Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Acta Cardiologica Sinica, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Heart failure (HF) remains a leading cause of global mortality; however, despite treatment advances, improvements in prognosis are limited. Non-invasive estimation of plasma volume status (ePVS) from hemoglobin and hematocrit may enhance prognostic accuracy and management. This meta-analysis investigates the association of ePVS with adverse outcomes in HF patients. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science up to June 8, 2024, using specific keywords. Two independent researchers performed the literature search and data extraction, resolving discrepancies through discussion or a third researcher if necessary. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and synthesized using a random-effects model. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore heterogeneity. Results: We included 12 articles with 23,282 patients. The highest ePVS group had increased all-cause mortality (HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.14-2.40; I Conclusions: Elevated ePVS predicts HF mortality and rehospitalization. Prospective validation of ePVS is warranted to assess its potential utility for improving risk stratification in clinical practice.
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.