MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509413483 · doi:10.1016/j.jchf.2015.02.006

Baroreflex Activation Therapy for the Treatment of Heart Failure With a Reduced Ejection Fraction

2015· article· en· W1509413483 on OpenAlexaffabout
William T. Abraham, Michael R. Zile, Fred A. Weaver, Christian Butter, Anique Ducharme, Marcel Halbach, Didier Klug, Eric G. Lovett, Jochen Müller‐Ehmsen, Jill Schafer, Michele Senni, Vijay Swarup, Rolf Wachter, William C. Little

Bibliographic record

VenueJACC Heart Failure · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstituteUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeart failureEjection fractionAdverse effectInternal medicineCardiologyQuality of life (healthcare)Randomized controlled trialClinical endpointBaroreflexBrain natriuretic peptideStroke (engine)Heart rateBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this clinical trial was to assess the safety and efficacy of carotid BAT in advanced HF. BACKGROUND: Increased sympathetic and decreased parasympathetic activity contribute to heart failure (HF) symptoms and disease progression. Baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) results in centrally mediated reduction of sympathetic outflow and increased parasympathetic activity. METHODS: Patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III HF and ejection fractions ≤35% on chronic stable guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) were enrolled at 45 centers in the United States, Canada, and Europe. They were randomly assigned to receive ongoing GDMT alone (control group) or ongoing GDMT plus BAT (treatment group) for 6 months. The primary safety end point was system- and procedure-related major adverse neurological and cardiovascular events. The primary efficacy end points were changes in NYHA functional class, quality-of-life score, and 6-minute hall walk distance. RESULTS: One hundred forty-six patients were randomized, 70 to control and 76 to treatment. The major adverse neurological and cardiovascular event-free rate was 97.2% (lower 95% confidence bound 91.4%). Patients assigned to BAT, compared with control group patients, experienced improvements in the distance walked in 6 min (59.6 ± 14 m vs. 1.5 ± 13.2 m; p = 0.004), quality-of-life score (-17.4 ± 2.8 points vs. 2.1 ± 3.1 points; p < 0.001), and NYHA functional class ranking (p = 0.002 for change in distribution). BAT significantly reduced N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (p = 0.02) and was associated with a trend toward fewer days hospitalized for HF (p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: BAT is safe and improves functional status, quality of life, exercise capacity, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, and possibly the burden of heart failure hospitalizations in patients with GDMT-treated NYHA functional class III HF. (Barostim Neo System in the Treatment of Heart Failure; NCT01471860; Barostim HOPE4HF [Hope for Heart Failure] Study; NCT01720160).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations282
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACC Heart FailureSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207