Acute Precipitants of Congestive Heart Failure Exacerbations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have prospectively and systematically explored the factors that acutely precipitate exacerbation of congestive heart failure (CHF) in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Knowledge of such factors is important in designing measures to prevent deterioration of clinical status. The objective of this study was to prospectively describe the precipitants associated with exacerbation of CHF status in patients enrolled in the Randomized Evaluation of Strategies for Left Ventricular Dysfunction Pilot Study. METHODS: We conducted a 2-stage, multicenter, randomized trial in 768 patients with CHF who had an ejection fraction of less than 40%. Patients were randomly assigned to receive enalapril maleate, candesartan cilexetil, or both for 17 weeks, followed by randomization to receive metoprolol succinate or placebo for 26 weeks. Investigators systematically documented information on clinical presentation, management, and factors associated with the exacerbation for any episode of acute CHF during follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 323 episodes of worsening of CHF occurred in 180 patients during 43 weeks of follow-up; 143 patients required hospitalization, and 5 died. Factors implicated in worsening of CHF status included noncompliance with salt restriction (22%); other noncardiac causes (20%), notably pulmonary infectious processes; study medications (15%); use of antiarrhythmic agents in the past 48 hours (15%); arrhythmias (13%); calcium channel blockers (13%); and inappropriate reductions in CHF therapy (10%). CONCLUSIONS: A variety of factors, many of which are avoidable, are associated with exacerbation of CHF. Attention to these factors and patient education are important in the prevention of CHF deterioration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".