Heart Failure and Obesity: Translational Approaches and Therapeutic Perspectives. A Scientific Statement of the Heart Failure Association of the ESC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obesity and heart failure (HF) represent two growing pandemics. In the general population, obesity affects one in eight adults and is linked with an increased risk for HF. Obesity is even more common in patients with HF, where it complicates the diagnosis of HF and is linked with worse symptoms and impaired exercise capacity. Over the past few years, new evidence on the mechanisms linking obesity with HF has been reported, particularly in relation to HF with preserved ejection fraction. Novel therapies inducing weight loss appear to have favourable effects on health status and cardiovascular risk. Against the backdrop of this rapidly evolving evidence landscape, HF clinicians are increasingly required to tailor their preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic approaches to HF in the presence of obesity. This scientific statement by the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology provides an up-to-date summary on obesity in HF, covering key areas such as epidemiology, translational aspects, diagnostic challenges, therapeutic approaches, and trial design.
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 | 0.018 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".