Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 188

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

ESC Working Group on Valvular Heart Disease Position Paper: assessing the risk of interventions in patients with valvular heart disease

Open access
Rosenhek, R., Iung, B., Tornos, P., Antunes, M. J., Prendergast, B. D., Otto, C. M., Kappetein, A. P., Stepinska, J., Kaden, J. J., Naber, C. K., Acarturk, E., Gohlke-Barwolf, C.·2012·European Heart Journal

Abstract

AIMS: Risk scores provide an important contribution to clinical decision-making, but their validity has been questioned in patients with valvular heart disease (VHD), since current scores have been mainly derived and validated in adults undergoing coronary bypass surgery. The Working Group on Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology reviewed the performance of currently available scores when applied to VHD, in order to guide clinical practice and future development of new scores. METHODS AND RESULTS: The most widely used risk scores (EuroSCORE, STS, and Ambler score) were reviewed, analysing variables included and their predictive ability when applied to patients with VHD. These scores provide relatively good discrimination, i.e. a gross estimation of risk category, but cannot be used to estimate the exact operative mortality in an individual patient because of unsatisfactory calibration. CONCLUSION: Current risk scores do not provide a reliable estimate of exact operative mortality in an individual patient with VHD. They should therefore be interpreted with caution and only used as part of an integrated approach, which incorporates other patient characteristics, the clinical context, and local outcome data. Future risk scores should include additional variables, such as cognitive and functional capacity and be prospectively validated in high-risk patients. Specific risk models should also be developed for newer interventions, such as transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

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 · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr061

Cites

5 of 5 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

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 188

Metadata

Authors
Rosenhek, R., Iung, B., Tornos, P., Antunes, M. J., Prendergast, B. D., Otto, C. M., Kappetein, A. P., Stepinska, J., Kaden, J. J., Naber, C. K., Acarturk, E., & Gohlke-Barwolf, C.
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2011-03-15
Volume
33
Issue
7
Pages
822-828
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W2162396364
Cited by
188
References
5
FWCI
18.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: ESC Working Group on Valvular Heart Disease Position Paper: assessing the risk of interventions in patients with valvular heart disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehr061
The paper
Rosenhek, R., Iung, B., Tornos, P., Antunes, M. J., Prendergast, B. D., Otto, C. M., Kappetein, A. P., Stepinska, J., Kaden, J. J., Naber, C. K., Acarturk, E., & Gohlke-Barwolf, C. (2012). ESC Working Group on Valvular Heart Disease Position Paper: assessing the risk of interventions in patients with valvular heart disease. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehr061

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.