Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,021

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Seattle Heart Failure Model: Prediction of Survival in Heart Failure

Open access
Levy, Wayne C., Mozaffarian, Dariush, Linker, David T., Sutradhar, Santosh C., Anker, Stefan D., Cropp, Anne B., Anand, Inder, Maggioni, Aldo, Burton, Paul, Sullivan, Mark D., Pitt, Bertram, Poole-Wilson, Philip A., Mann, Douglas L., Packer, Milton·2006·Circulation
DOI 10.1161/circulationaha.105.584102
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background— Heart failure has an annual mortality rate ranging from 5% to 75%. The purpose of the study was to develop and validate a multivariate risk model to predict 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival in heart failure patients with the use of easily obtainable characteristics relating to clinical status, therapy (pharmacological as well as devices), and laboratory parameters. Methods and Results— The Seattle Heart Failure Model was derived in a cohort of 1125 heart failure patients with the use of a multivariate Cox model. For medications and devices not available in the derivation database, hazard ratios were estimated from published literature. The model was prospectively validated in 5 additional cohorts totaling 9942 heart failure patients and 17 307 person-years of follow-up. The accuracy of the model was excellent, with predicted versus actual 1-year survival rates of 73.4% versus 74.3% in the derivation cohort and 90.5% versus 88.5%, 86.5% versus 86.5%, 83.8% versus 83.3%, 90.9% versus 91.0%, and 89.6% versus 86.7% in the 5 validation cohorts. For the lowest score, the 2-year survival was 92.8% compared with 88.7%, 77.8%, 58.1%, 29.5%, and 10.8% for scores of 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The overall receiver operating characteristic area under the curve was 0.729 (95% CI, 0.714 to 0.744). The model also allowed estimation of the benefit of adding medications or devices to an individual patient’s therapeutic regimen. Conclusions— The Seattle Heart Failure Model provides an accurate estimate of 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival with the use of easily obtained clinical, pharmacological, device, and laboratory characteristics.

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/circulationaha.105.584102

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Levy, W. C., Mozaffarian, D., Linker, D. T., Sutradhar, S. C., Anker, S. D., Cropp, A. B., Anand, I., Maggioni, A., Burton, P., Sullivan, M. D., Pitt, B., Poole-Wilson, P. A., Mann, D. L., & Packer, M.
Venue
Circulation
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2006-03-21
Volume
113
Issue
11
Pages
1424-1433
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
DOI
10.1161/circulationaha.105.584102
OpenAlex
W2103679597
Cited by
2,021
References
6
FWCI
48.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

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.