FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3207653778> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3207653778 abstract "Abstract Background Predicting survival in patients with advanced heart failure (HF) remains difficult and prognostic scores such as the Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM) are cumbersome to use. Alternative approaches like the Surprise Question (SC) or the number of HF hospitalisations within the last year (NoH) could simplify prognostication. Purpose We assessed the prognostic utility of the SHFM, SC and NoH for predicting one-year survival status in patients with advanced HF. Methods A secondary analysis of a multisite, single-blinded cluster-randomized, controlled trial to test whether a structured intervention of educational content and automated reminders increased the likelihood of ICD deactivation conversations and ICD deactivation. The study was performed within the advanced HF practices at six US academic medical centers, between September 2011 to February 2016. Patient eligibility criteria included advanced HF, an implantable cardiac defibrillator and a high risk of death, with complete data on SHFM, SC, NoH and one-year survival status. SHFM survival was calculated from baseline variables; the SC (“Would you be surprised if the patient were to die within one year?”) was answered by cardiologists; and the NoH was extracted from medical records. For prediction of survival status, cut-offs for predicted survival per SHFM and NoH were chosen empirically by means of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis maximising Youden's index. The resulting binary prediction models were assessed based on area under the ROC curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity. Results Of the 535 subjects in our sample, 82 (15.3%) had died after one-year of follow-up. For the SHFM and the NoH, optimal cut-offs were found to be a predicted survival &lt;86% and ≥2 hospitalisations, respectively. Performance metrics of prognostic models are detailed in Table 1. The SHFM yielded an AUC of 0.65 (0.60–0.71 95% confidence interval [CI]), a sensitivity of 0.76 (0.65–0.84 95% CI), and a specificity of 0.55 (0.50–0.60 95% CI). The SC demonstrated a comparable AUC 0.58 (0.54–0.63 95% CI), similar sensitivity 0.84 (0.74–0.91 95% CI), but lower specificity 0.33 (0.28–0.37 95% CI) compared to the SHFM. The NoH demonstrated a comparable AUC 0.56 (0.50–0.62 95% CI), similar sensitivity 0.56 (0.45–0.67 95% CI), and similar specificity 0.56 (0.51–0.61 95% CI) compared to the SHFM. The combination of positive SC and NoH ≥2 showed significantly higher specificity compared to the SHFM (0.68 [0.64–0.73 95% CI]). Conclusion The SC and NoH are clinically feasible bedside alternatives to the more complex SHFM model, yet yield similar overall prognostic utility for one-year survival status among advanced HF patients. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute" @default.
• W3207653778 created "2021-10-25" @default.
• W3207653778 creator A5003261736 @default.
• W3207653778 creator A5011428116 @default.
• W3207653778 creator A5039546462 @default.
• W3207653778 creator A5040171930 @default.
• W3207653778 date "2021-10-01" @default.
• W3207653778 modified "2023-10-03" @default.
• W3207653778 title "Comparison of one-year survival prediction tools in patients with advanced heart failure" @default.
• W3207653778 doi "https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab724.0844" @default.
• W3207653778 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
• W3207653778 type Work @default.
• W3207653778 sameAs 3207653778 @default.
• W3207653778 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W3207653778 countsByYear W32076537782023 @default.
• W3207653778 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3207653778 hasAuthorship W3207653778A5003261736 @default.
• W3207653778 hasAuthorship W3207653778A5011428116 @default.
• W3207653778 hasAuthorship W3207653778A5039546462 @default.
• W3207653778 hasAuthorship W3207653778A5040171930 @default.
• W3207653778 hasBestOaLocation W32076537781 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConcept C10515644 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConcept C2778198053 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConcept C43346845 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConcept C58471807 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConcept C76318530 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConceptScore W3207653778C10515644 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConceptScore W3207653778C126322002 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConceptScore W3207653778C164705383 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConceptScore W3207653778C2778198053 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConceptScore W3207653778C43346845 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConceptScore W3207653778C58471807 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConceptScore W3207653778C71924100 @default.
• W3207653778 hasConceptScore W3207653778C76318530 @default.
• W3207653778 hasIssue "Supplement_1" @default.
• W3207653778 hasLocation W32076537781 @default.
• W3207653778 hasOpenAccess W3207653778 @default.
• W3207653778 hasPrimaryLocation W32076537781 @default.
• W3207653778 hasRelatedWork W2157758999 @default.
• W3207653778 hasRelatedWork W2347370180 @default.
• W3207653778 hasRelatedWork W2364996258 @default.
• W3207653778 hasRelatedWork W2414570500 @default.
• W3207653778 hasRelatedWork W2415320528 @default.
• W3207653778 hasRelatedWork W2515228867 @default.
• W3207653778 hasRelatedWork W2918454308 @default.
• W3207653778 hasRelatedWork W3009182196 @default.
• W3207653778 hasRelatedWork W3028706009 @default.
• W3207653778 hasRelatedWork W52484821 @default.
• W3207653778 hasVolume "42" @default.
• W3207653778 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3207653778 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3207653778 magId "3207653778" @default.
• W3207653778 workType "article" @default.