Persistent Orthopnea and the Prognosis of Patients in the Heart Failure Clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart failure (HF) is a public health problem with ever-growing costs. Signs such as jugular venous pressure and third heart sound have been associated with disease prognosis. Symptoms of heart failure are frequently subjective, and their real value is often overlooked. The authors aimed to assess the relationship between orthopnea and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and hospitalization rate in patients referred to the HF clinic. One hundred fifty-three new consecutive patients referred to the HF clinic from September 2001 to July 2002 were reviewed. Information about orthopnea was available at baseline and at a 6-month to 1-year follow-up. One hundred thirty-one patients had a baseline multigated radionuclide ventriculogram scan, and 68 patients had a follow-up multigated radionuclide ventriculogram scan available. The patients were divided into groups by presence of orthopnea and compared with respect to LVEF and hospitalization rate. Patients with or without orthopnea had similar LVEFs at baseline (32%+/-17% vs. 33%+/-15%, respectively; p=NS). However, patients who were orthopnea-free at the follow-up visit had a significant LVEF improvement whereas patients with ongoing orthopnea at follow-up had no LVEF improvement (11%+/-13% vs. -1%+/-6%; p<0.001). Patients who presented with persistent orthopnea had a significantly higher rate of hospitalization (64% vs. 15.3%; p=0.0001). Persistent orthopnea in HF patients is associated with a significantly higher rate of hospitalization and with worsening or no improvement in LVEF. Patients with persistent orthopnea may require a more aggressive approach to improve their outcome. This result may help centers with limited access to LVEF measurements to better stratify HF patients' risk.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".