Heart Failure and Sepsis-Related Mortality Trends in the United States, 1999 - 2019: An Analysis of Gender, Race/Ethnicity, and Regional Disparities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Heart failure (HF) and sepsis are significant causes of disease burden and mortality among the elderly population of the USA. HF causes fluid overload, which complicates the treatment approach when patients develop sepsis necessitating fluid resuscitation. While individual disease states have been studied extensively, the trends in mortality for concurrent sepsis and HF are not well known. Methods: Mortality trends due to sepsis and HF in individuals aged 65 and older in the USA from 1999 to 2019 were analyzed using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (CDC WONDER) database. Differences in age-adjusted mortality rate (AAMR) and average annual percent change (AAPC) over the past two decades based on gender, race, region, and place of death were examined. Results: Between 1999 and 2019, there were a total of 5,887,799 deaths related to HF, 2,584,523 deaths related to sepsis, and 250,115 deaths related to both HF and sepsis. There was also a decrease in AAMR for HF-related (AAPC -0.80%) and sepsis-related (AAPC -0.28) deaths but an increase in combined HF and sepsis-related AAMR (AAPC 1.06%). Men had consistently higher AAMRs compared to women and a greater increase in mortality (AAPC in men 1.53% vs. women 0.56%). African American patients had a higher AAMR than White patients throughout the study period, though the difference narrowed. African Americans saw a decrease in overall HF and sepsis-related AAMR from 48.90 to 40.56 (AAPC -0.83), whereas AAMR for the White population increased from 27.26 to 33.81 (AAPC 1.37). Regionally, the Northeast had the highest AAMR in 1999 (32.32) but decreased to the lowest AAMR by 2019 (30.77). Totally, 203,368 (81.31%) of all deaths related to HF and sepsis were in medical facilities, 18,430 (7.37%) were in home/hospice facilities, and 24,713 (9.88%) in nursing homes. Conclusions: HF and sepsis-related mortality in the elderly population increased over the past two decades, with men and African Americans at disproportionately higher 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".