MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3032924626 · doi:10.37616/2212-5043.1040

Heart Failure In The Middle East Arab Countries: Current And Future Perspectives

2020· review· en· W3032924626 on OpenAlexaff
Abdelfatah Elasfar, Waleed AlHabeeb, Salma Elasfar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Saudi Heart Association · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeart failureMedicineHeart transplantationCoronary artery diseaseDeveloping countryEjection fractionPopulationEpidemiologyDeveloped countryHeart diseaseIntensive care medicineCardiologyInternal medicineEconomic growthEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For many years, data about heart failure (HF) was only limited to Western countries but in the last few years, well designed heart failure registries have been conducted in many developing countries. The purpose of this review is to summarize the current status regarding the epidemiology and management of heart failure in Middle East Arab countries (MEACs) by analysis of the results of the latest HF registries performed in these countries and to anticipate future perspectives, quality initiatives and areas of research and development. Data has shown that the average age of affected individuals is at least 10 years younger than their Western counterparts. Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction was generally under-represented in these registries to less than 30% of the whole population of heart failure. Coronary artery disease (CAD) constitutes about 55% of causes of heart failure in this region in comparison to about 70% in Western countries. An area that needs development is the investment in establishing specialized heart failure programs to cut the circle of non-compliance and repeated HF admissions to the hospitals. Advances in heart transplantation and mechanical circulatory support will continue to slow down and we are not expecting major changes in the near future but on the other hand, implantation of electronic devices like ICD and CRT is expected to increase significantly in the coming years in these countries.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.310
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations55
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Saudi Heart AssociationSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207