MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411545772 · doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2025.06.010

Prognostic Role of Right Atrial Reservoir Strain in Acute Heart Failure

2025· article· en· W4411545772 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vasileios Anastasiou, Αndreas S. Papazoglou, Stylianos Daios, Emmanouela Peteinidou, Anastasia Nikolaidou, E F Fardoulis, Matthaios Didagelos, Theodoros D. Karamitsos, George Giannakoulas, Victoria Delgado, Antonios Ziakas, Vasileios Kamperidis

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Cardiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineHeart failureStrain (injury)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Right atrial (RA) dysfunction might indicate an advanced stage of heart failure (HF). The prognostic role of RA dysfunction, assessed according to RA reservoir strain (RArS), in hospitalized acute HF patients remains undetermined. METHODS: All consecutive patients hospitalized for acute HF were prospectively enrolled and had speckle-tracking echocardiography at discharge. The primary end point was all-cause mortality and HF rehospitalization. The patients were divided in 2 groups, on the basis of the RArS cutoff value derived from spline curve analysis. RESULTS: Of 401 patients (73.3 ± 12.1 years old; 60% male), 244 (55.1%) had RArS ≥ 11.4% and 177 (44.9%) had RArS < 11.4%. Worse left atrial and right ventricular (RV) function, larger RA size, and smaller left ventricular size were independently associated with RArS < 11.4%. During a median follow-up of 6 (interquartile range, 2.3-9.8) months, 141 (35.2%) patients reached the primary end point. Patients with RArS < 11.4% showed significantly higher percentage of cumulative events compared with patients with RArS ≥ 11.4% (49.2% vs 24.1%, respectively; log rank P < 0.001). Lower RArS was independently associated with the primary end point as a continuous (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.95 [95% confidence interval, 0.92-0.99]; P =0.006) and as a categorical (RArS <11.4%: adjusted hazard ratio, 1.80 [95% confidence interval, 1.05-3.08]; P = 0.032) variable. RArS provided incremental prognostic value over relevant clinical and echocardiographic variables including RV size, RV function, and RA size. CONCLUSIONS: Impaired RArS was independently associated with worse outcomes in hospitalized patients with acute HF. Its assessment before discharge could potentially allow refined risk stratification. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05573997.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CardiologySame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207