Heart failure & cardiomyopathies

Prediction Models for Heart Failure in the Community: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Eur J Heart FailPublished Systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors' conclusion

Prediction models for estimating risk of incident HF in the community demonstrate excellent discrimination performance.

Study context

Population
Community-based cohorts; multivariable models derived, validated and/or augmented for incident heart failure (HF) prediction36 studies · 59 models
Comparison
Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) vs GRAM vs PCP-HF white men vs PCP-HF white women vs RETAIN
Outcome
Discrimination (summary c-statistic) of HF prediction models
Methodological detailsBayesian meta-analysis, MEDLINE and EMBASE searched from inception to 3 November 2022
  • Bayesian meta-analysis
  • MEDLINE and EMBASE searched from inception to 3 November 2022

Pooled result

As reported in the abstract

Summary c-statistic

ARIC

0.802

summary c-statistic · 95% CI 0.707–0.883

GRAM

0.791

summary c-statistic · 95% CI 0.677–0.885

PCP-HF white men

0.820

summary c-statistic · 95% CI 0.792–0.843

PCP-HF white women

0.852

summary c-statistic · 95% CI 0.804–0.895

RETAIN

0.839

summary c-statistic · 95% CI 0.748–0.916

Further pooled results

Discrimination in cohorts with a uniform prediction window

ARIC risk score and PCP-HF models had significant summary discrimination

Risk of bias (PROBAST), certainty of evidence, clinical impact

Model results at high risk of bias
77%
Certainty of evidence low
No model had a clinical impact study

Original publication

Prediction Models for Heart Failure in the Community: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Eur J Heart Fail. Published 31 July 2023. doi:10.1002/ejhf.2970

Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it

Get them every week

New studies on this topic in My Week and in your Monday e-mail.

We e-mail you a sign-in link and a code. No password, no spam.