Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Multicentre studies have become major tools to collect data regarding clinical characteristics, prognosis, and treatment effects in patients with heart failure (HF). This is mirrored in our current issue of the journal. Most of the data regarding cardiogenic shock have been obtained from registries of patients with myocardial infarction. CardShock is the largest European multicentre observational study including 219 patients with the whole spectrum of aetiologies of cardiogenic shock.1 Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) was the most common cause of shock (81%), and 62% of patients developed shock after admission to hospital. In-hospital mortality was 37%, lower than in other registries, and ACS aetiology, age, previous myocardial infarction, prior coronary artery bypass, confusion, low LVEF, and blood lactate levels were independently associated with increased mortality. A risk score for in-hospital mortality including these variables and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was developed from this study.1 The International REgistry to assess medical Practice with lOngitudinal obseRvation for Treatment of Heart Failure (REPORT-HF) is a global, prospective, observational study designed to characterize patients' clinical course during and following a HF hospitalization. This registry will be conducted at ∼300 sites located in ∼40 countries with the planned enrolment of ∼20 000 patients hospitalized for new-onset HF or decompensation of chronic HF over a 3-year period with subsequent 3 years of follow-up. Thus, both the in-hospital phase and the transition to the outpatient setting and long-term follow-up will be assessed in this study, which is probably going to be the largest registry on HF including patients from all continents. Its rationale and design are published in the current issue of our journal.2 In the Prospective comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor (ARNI) with Angiotensin receptor Blocker (ARB) on Management Of heart failUre with preserved ejectioN fracTion (PARAMOUNT) study, 12 weeks treatment with LCZ696 reduced NT-proBNP to a larger extent than valsartan in patients with HF and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and this effect was independent from changes in the systolic blood pressure.3, 4 In this issue of the journal, Voors et al. analyse the changes in renal function in the PARAMOUNT study and show that LCZ696 administration was associated with less decline in the eGFR and worsening of renal function, with an increase the urinary albumin to creatinine ratio, compared with placebo.5 In the Systolic Heart Failure Treatment with the If Inhibitor Ivabradine Trial (SHIFT) trial, ivabradine administration decreased the rate of the primary endpoint, a composite of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization, as well as HF hospitalizations and HF deaths.6 Analysis of 24-h Holter recordings was a pre-specified substudy of this trial, and its results are shown in this issue of the journal.7 Heart rate reduction with ivabradine was similar in resting office and in 24-h, awake, and asleep recordings, with beneficial effects on HR variability and no meaningful increases in supraventricular or ventricular arrhythmias. Ivabradine administration was associated with an increased rate of episodes of heart rate reduction <40 b.p.m., but no episode of heart rate <30 b.p.m. and no RR intervals >3 s were recorded in patients on ivabradine.7
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,628 | 0,475 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».