MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7020876522

Meta-analysis of B-type natriuretic peptide in diagnosis of congestive heart failure in different clinical settings

2010· other· en· W7020876522 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) · 2010
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeart failureNatriuretic peptideConfidence intervalOdds ratioVentricleLikelihood ratios in diagnostic testingDiagnostic odds ratioCoronary artery disease
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Osama E Elkhateeb Iqbal Bata Simon JacksonDalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, CanadaBackground: B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) is a neurohormone released from the left ventricle in response to ventricular wall stress and pressure overload. BNP testing has been developed, and aids in identification of patients with suspected congestive heart failure (CHF). The objective of this study was to evaluate the role of BNP as a diagnostic marker of CHF, and determine its value in different clinical settings.Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies regarding BNP and CHF was conducted. A comprehensive search of Medline, the Cochrane Library, and the reference sections of the primary studies was done. The methodologic quality of each study that met the inclusion criteria was assessed. The results of individual studies were described. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Estimation of the diagnostic accuracy was done using meta-regression of the diagnostic odds ratio and summarized by a summary receiver-operating curve (S-ROC).Results: In total, 32 studies (n = 11054) met the inclusion criteria. The overall sensitivity and specificity at the optimum cutoff point are 81% (95% confidence interval: 0.76–0.86) and 86% (95% confidence interval: 0.81–0.89), respectively. The area under the S-ROC for all studies is 0.92. Nine papers included patients with dyspnea. The pooled negative likelihood ratio for this group was 0.12. Five studies included patients with chronic CHF and another seven studies included patients who were referred for echocardiography. The remaining studies were patients from the general population, patients with stable coronary artery disease, and patients referred for cardiac catheterization.Conclusion: BNP is a valuable tool in the diagnosis of CHF. It should be applied in the appropriate clinical setting. The strongest evidence of benefit for use of BNP is in patients presenting to the emergency room with dyspnea.Keywords: B-type natriuretic peptide, congestive heart failure, neurohormone, summary receiver-operating curve, dyspnea

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.062
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group)Same topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207