Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,611

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Risk Stratification for In-Hospital Mortality in Acutely Decompensated Heart Failure<SUBTITLE>Classification and Regression Tree Analysis</SUBTITLE>

Fonarow, Gregg C.·2005·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Estimation of mortality risk in patients hospitalized with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) may help clinicians guide care. OBJECTIVE: To develop a practical user-friendly bedside tool for risk stratification for patients hospitalized with ADHF. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: The Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry (ADHERE) of patients hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of ADHF in 263 hospitals in the United States was queried with analysis of patient data to develop a risk stratification model. The first 33,046 hospitalizations (derivation cohort; October 2001-February 2003) were analyzed to develop the model and then the validity of the model was prospectively tested using data from 32,229 subsequent hospitalizations (validation cohort; March-July 2003). Patients had a mean age of 72.5 years and 52% were female. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Variables predicting mortality in ADHF. RESULTS: When the derivation and validation cohorts are combined, 37,772 (58%) of 65,275 patient-records had coronary artery disease. Of a combined cohort consisting of 52,164 patient-records, 23,910 (46%) had preserved left ventricular systolic function. In-hospital mortality was similar in the derivation (4.2%) and validation (4.0%) cohorts. Recursive partitioning of the derivation cohort for 39 variables indicated that the best single predictor for mortality was high admission levels of blood urea nitrogen (> or =43 mg/dL [15.35 mmol/L]) followed by low admission systolic blood pressure (<115 mm Hg) and then by high levels of serum creatinine (> or =2.75 mg/dL [243.1 micromol/L]). A simple risk tree identified patient groups with mortality ranging from 2.1% to 21.9%. The odds ratio for mortality between patients identified as high and low risk was 12.9 (95% confidence interval, 10.4-15.9) and similar results were seen when this risk stratification was applied prospectively to the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that ADHF patients at low, intermediate, and high risk for in-hospital mortality can be easily identified using vital sign and laboratory data obtained on hospital admission. The ADHERE risk tree provides clinicians with a validated, practical bedside tool for mortality risk stratification.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.293.5.572

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,611

Metadata

Authors
Fonarow, G. C.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2005-02-02
Volume
293
Issue
5
Pages
572
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2013009184
Cited by
1,611
References
1
FWCI
55.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Risk Stratification for In-Hospital Mortality in Acutely Decompensated Heart Failure<SUBTITLE>Classification and Regression Tree Analysis</SUBTITLE>. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.293.5.572
The paper
Fonarow, G. C. (2005). Risk Stratification for In-Hospital Mortality in Acutely Decompensated Heart Failure<SUBTITLE>Classification and Regression Tree Analysis</SUBTITLE>. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.5.572

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.