MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415642985 · doi:10.1155/cdr/9108324

Is Carvedilol Effective in Preventing and Modulating Concentric Cardiac Remodelling? A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta‐Analyses

2025· review· en· W4415642985 on OpenAlex
Alice Valeria Wiyono, Azizah Puspitasari Ardinal

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiovascular Therapeutics · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing's College LondonKing's University College
KeywordsCarvedilolDiastoleHeart failureConcentricCardiac dysfunction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Carvedilol, commonly used to treat hypertension and known for its vasodilatory and pleiotropic effects, has been studied in various patient populations. However, its specific impact on diastolic dysfunction and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains unclear. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate carvedilol's efficacy in preventing concentric cardiac remodelling in at-risk individuals and modulating it in patients with HFpEF. Methods: In adherence to PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed and ScienceDirect up to March 2024 using terms related to carvedilol and HFpEF. We included randomised controlled trials and prospective cohort studies published in English. Outcomes include changes in natriuretic peptides and echocardiography parameters of diastolic function. Exclusion criteria encompassed non-English studies, nonhuman studies and studies not using carvedilol or exclusively involving HFrEF patients. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data synthesis was performed using a random-effects meta-analysis with sensitivity analyses and a leave-one-out procedure to explore heterogeneity. Results: Eighteen studies involving 2233 participants were included. Various populations were included: those with HFpEF or undergoing cardiotoxic chemotherapy. Meta-analysis did not reveal significant effects of carvedilol on echocardiography parameters such as E/A ratio (mean difference 0.04, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.08), E/e⁣' ratio (mean difference -0.50, 95% CI -1.39 to 0.39) and LVMI (mean difference 0.21, 95% CI -3.13 to 3.55), with substantial heterogeneity observed in LVEF, LVMI and BNP. Conclusion: Carvedilol does not significantly impact diastolic dysfunction across various populations. However, the diversity of study populations and outcomes contributes to the heterogeneity of results.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.264 · 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