MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415458403 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.70065

Global Registries and Surveys Programme–Heart Failure (GRASP-HF): Rationale, Study Design and Research Implications

2025· article· en· W4415458403 on OpenAlexaff
Ovidiu Chioncel, Gianluigi Savarese, Cécile Laroche, Offer Amir, Mariya Tokmakova, Antonio Cannatà, Doan Loi, Tarek A Kafafy, Jan Krejčí, Brenda Moura, Lars Lund, Marianna Adamo, Wendy Guillouche, Maurizio Volterani, Bernard Iung, Marco Metra

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccreditationHeart failureGuidelineObservational studyHealth careMEDLINEQuality (philosophy)Randomized controlled trialClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart failure (HF) is characterized by increasing prevalence, high morbidity and mortality, poor quality of life, and substantial healthcare costs. Despite advancements in pharmacologic and device-based therapies, translating evidence from randomized controlled trials into clinical practice remains suboptimal. The Global Registries and Surveys Programme-Heart Failure (GRASP-HF) is a pan-European, snapshot, observational study, aiming at assessing the real-world implementation of evidence-based HF management. GRASP-HF captures both acute and chronic HF presentations to assess the adherence to the 2021 and 2023 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) HF Guidelines. It also serves as a platform for the accreditation of HF centres for the Improving Care through Accreditation and Recognition in Heart Failure (ICARe-HF) programme. This manuscript outlines the rationale, methodology, and design of GRASP-HF. Unlike previous registries, GRASP-HF ensures that all patients are consecutively enrolled over a pre-defined 2-month period, minimizing selection bias. GRASP-HF offers a real-time perspective on diagnostic strategies, use of guideline-recommended medical therapy and implementation of quality-of-care indicators. In addition, GRASP-HF addresses less explored domains by other registries, such as frailty, rare aetiologies (e.g. amyloidosis, genetic cardiomyopathies, Takotsubo syndrome), as well as non-fatal events during hospitalization and follow-up. GRASP-HF is also designed to inform ESC educational strategies and to benchmark progresses in HF care across European and non-European centres. In conjunction with ICARe-HF, annual repetition of GRASP-HF aims to facilitate continuous feedback between evidence, practice, and quality improvement. GRASP-HF will assist National Cardiac Societies in shaping national and institutional policies and will contribute with data-driven insights to future guideline development.

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)0.222
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.250
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2220.250
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.005

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.288 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207