Outcomes at One Year in Women with Peripartum Cardiomyopathy: Findings from the ESC EORP PPCM Registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: There are few prospective reports of 1-year outcomes for women with peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM). We report findings from the European Society of Cardiology EURObservational Research Programme PPCM Registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: The registry enrolled women from 51 countries from 2012 to 2018. Eligibility included: (i) a peripartum state, (ii) signs or symptoms of heart failure, (iii) left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction ≤45%, (iv) exclusion of alternative causes of heart failure. We report mortality, thromboembolism, stroke, rehospitalization, LV recovery and remodelling at 1 year. Differences between regions were compared. One-year mortality data were available in 535 (71%) women and follow-up differed across regions. At 1 year, death from any cause occurred in 8.4% of women, with regional variation (Europe 4.9%, Africa 6.5%, Asia-Pacific 9.2%, Middle East 18.9%; p < 0.001). The frequencies of thromboembolism and stroke were 6.3% and 2.5%, respectively, and were similar across regions. A total of 14.0% of women had at least one rehospitalization and 3.5% had recurrent rehospitalizations (i.e. two or more). Overall, 66.1% of women had recovery of LV function (22% between 6 months and 1 year), with a mean LV ejection fraction increase from baseline of 21.2% (±13.6). Recovery occurred most frequently in Asia-Pacific (77.5%) and least frequently in the Middle East (32.7%). There were significant regional differences in the use of heart failure pharmacotherapies. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 1 in 12 women with PPCM had died by 1 year and thromboembolism and stroke occurred in 6.3% and 2.5%, respectively. Around 1 in 7 women had been rehospitalized and, in 1 in 3, LV recovery had not occurred. PPCM is associated with substantial mortality and morbidity globally.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".