Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 553

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

Evidence of Improving Prognosis in Heart Failure: Trends in Case Fatality in 66 547 Patients Hospitalized Between 1986 and 1995

MacIntyre, K., Capewell, S., Stewart, S., Chalmers, J.W.T., Boyd, J., Finlayson, A., Redpath, A., Pell, J.P., McMurray, J.J.V.·2000·Circulation

Abstract

Background —Contemporary survival in unselected patients with heart failure and the population impact of newer therapies have not been widely studied. Therefore, we have documented case-fatality rates (CFRs) over a recent 10-year period. Methods and Results —In Scotland, all hospitalizations and deaths are captured on a single database. We have studied case fatality in all patients admitted with a principal diagnosis of heart failure from 1986 to 1995. A total of 66 547 patients (47% male) were studied. Median age was 72 years in men and 78 years in women. Crude CFRs at 30 days and at 1, 5, and 10 years were 19.9%, 44.5%, 76.5%, and 87.6%, respectively. Median survival was 1.47 years in men and 1.39 years in women (2.47 and 2.36 years, respectively, in those surviving 30 days). Age had a powerful effect on survival, and sex, comorbidity, and deprivation had modest effects. One-year CF was 24.2% in those aged <55 years and 58.1% in those aged >84 years. After adjustment, 30-day CFRs fell between 1986 and 1995, by 26% (95% CI 15 to 35, P <0.0001) in men and 17% (95% CI 6 to 26, P <0.0001) in women. Longer term CFRs fell by 18% (95% CI 13 to 24, P <0.0001) in men and 15% (95% CI 10 to 20, P <0.0001) in women. Median survival increased from 1.23 to 1.64 years. Conclusions —Heart failure CF is much higher in the general population than in clinical trials, especially in the elderly. Although survival has increased significantly over the last decade, there is still much room for improvement.

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 · 10.1161/01.cir.102.10.1126

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 553

Metadata

Authors
MacIntyre, K., Capewell, S., Stewart, S., Chalmers, J. W. T., Boyd, J., Finlayson, A., Redpath, A., Pell, J. P., & McMurray, J. J. V.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2000-09-05
Volume
102
Issue
10
Pages
1126-1131
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2165735403
Cited by
553
References
1
FWCI
25.15
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: Evidence of Improving Prognosis in Heart Failure: Trends in Case Fatality in 66 547 Patients Hospitalized Between 1986 and 1995. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.102.10.1126
The paper
MacIntyre, K., Capewell, S., Stewart, S., Chalmers, J. W. T., Boyd, J., Finlayson, A., Redpath, A., Pell, J. P., & McMurray, J. J. V. (2000). Evidence of Improving Prognosis in Heart Failure: Trends in Case Fatality in 66 547 Patients Hospitalized Between 1986 and 1995. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.102.10.1126

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.