Death, hospitalization, emergency department visits and out-patient visits in patients with heart failure in contemporary practice: results from the prospective Europeam 9069-patient ARIADNE registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background In Europe, heart failure (HF) is managed in variable settings and frequently in office-based practice. In HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) there is now extensive evidence based therapy, but implementation is inconsistent, variable and overall inadequate. The Assessment of Real lIfe cAre –Describing EuropeaN hEart failure management (ARIADNE) registry aimed to assess in detail how outpatients with HFrEF are managed in Europe in contemporary practice. Methods ARIADNE was a prospective non-interventional registry of patients with HFrEF (NYHA class II-IV) treated by office-based cardiologists or selected primary care physicians (recognized as HF specialists) in a real world setting. Patients were enrolled in 687 centres in 17 European countries, and studied at baseline and after 6 and 12 months. Key pre-specified outcomes were deaths, hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and office visits, and their primary reasons. Results Over 20 months, we enrolled 9069 patients; median age 69 (19–96) years, 24% women, with 30% older than 75 years, 61% NYHA class II, with a median EF 35% (30–40%). Over a median follow-up of 353 (1–631) days, 382 patients (4.3%) died, with 171 cardiovascular deaths (1.9%). The rates of total hospitalizations overall, for HF, and for non-HF cardiovascular reasons were 19.3, 8.1, and 4.8 per 100 patient years, respectively; and rates of emergency department visits overall, for HF reasons, and for non-HF CV reason were 7.7, 1.6, and 1.8, respectively. The number of HF office visits were on average 1.0 per patient. Conclusions In this large multinational HFrEF registry with detailed data on cause-specific outcomes and health care utilization, incidence of death was low and outpatient HF visits were few, but incidence of HF and CV hospitalization and emergency department visits was high. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Private company. Main funding source(s): Novartis AG, Switzerland
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".