ArticleDrugs & aging2026
Patterns of Evidence-Based Medication Use in Older Adults with Chronic Heart Failure in Slovakia: A Population-Based Study Using the National Health Information Center Database.
Article in Drugs & aging, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrescribing of evidence-based heart failure (HF) medications in older adults varies across settings, and population-level data from Central and Eastern Europe are scarce. Our study aimed to (a) evaluate the use of evidence-based medications among older adults with chronic HF and (b) identify patient- and healthcare-related characteristics associated with the use of evidence-based medications.
methodsIn our retrospective register-based study, all patients aged ≥ 65 years in whom at least one medication was prescribed in association with newly diagnosed HF during the period of 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2021 were included. Patients were divided into non-users, new users and prevalent users of evidence-based medications. Non-users were defined as patients who did not receive the specific medication class being analysed. New users were the patients in whom the use of such medications was initiated in association with the newly diagnosed HF without having a prescription for them during the previous 3 years. In prevalent users, these medications were used for diagnoses other than HF before inclusion in our study. Patient- and healthcare-related characteristics potentially associated with the use of evidence-based medications were evaluated with binary logistic regression models comparing the group of new users with non-users.
resultsThe following proportions of users (both new and prevalent) were observed in our study group of 111,774 patients: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin-receptor blockers/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor were prescribed in 78.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 78.3-78.8), β-blockers in 76.2% (95% CI 75.9-76.4), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in 41.1% (95% CI 40.8-41.4), digoxin in 13.5% (95% CI 13.3-13.7), ivabradine in 3.8% (95% CI 3.7-3.9) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in 3.7% (95% CI 3.6-3.8) of patients. Specialisation of the physicians in internal medicine/cardiology, or in diabetology in the case of SGLT2 inhibitors, showed the strongest association with the prescription of analysed medications. Comorbidities were associated with the use of evaluated medications when they constituted indications or contraindications for their administration.
conclusionAmong older adults with HF, the prescription of evidence-based medications was strongly associated with physician specialty, reflecting the importance of specialised expertise in the management of HF.
Identifiers
42814387What 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.