This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

40/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. End-of-life care

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Chronic heart failure (CHF) is the leading cause of hospitalization for those over the age of 65 and represents a significant clinical and economic burden. About half of hospital re-admissions are related to co-morbidities, polypharmacy and disabilities associated with CHF. Moreover, CHF also has an enormous cost in terms of poor prognosis with an average one year mortality of 33%-35%. While more than half of patients with CHF are over 75 years, most clinical trials have included younger patients with a mean age of 61 years. Inadequate data makes treatment decisions challenging for the providers. Older CHF patients are more often female, have less cardiovascular diseases and associated risk factors, but higher rates of non-cardiovascular conditions and diastolic dysfunction. The prevalence of CHF with reduced ejection fraction, ischemic heart disease, and its risk factors declines with age, whereas the prevalence of non-cardiac co-morbidities, such as chronic renal failure, dementia, anemia and malignancy increases with age. Diabetes and hypertension are among the strongest risk factors as predictors of CHF particularly among women with coronary heart disease. This review paper will focus on the specific consideration for CHF assessment in the older population. Management strategies will be reviewed, including non-pharmacologic, pharmacologic, quality care indicators, quality improvement in care transition and lastly, end-of-life issues. Palliative care should be an integral part of an interdisciplinary team approach for a comprehensive care plan over the whole disease trajectory. In addition, frailty contributes valuable prognostic insight incremental to existing risk models and assists clinicians in defining optimal care pathways for their patients.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Azad, N., & Lemay, G. (2014). Management of chronic heart failure in the older population. Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC. https://doi.org/10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2014.04.008

Vancouver

Azad N, Lemay G. Management of chronic heart failure in the older population. Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC. 2014. doi:10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2014.04.008. PMID: 25593582.

BibTeX

@article{azad2014-25593582,
  author  = {Azad, N. and Lemay, G.},
  title   = {{Management of chronic heart failure in the older population}},
  journal = {Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC},
  year    = {2014},
  doi     = {10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2014.04.008},
  pmid    = {25593582},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2014.04.008}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: this is a narrative review. It summarises a field without a fixed search method, so it shows how authors read the evidence rather than measuring it. Use it to find the primary studies, not as a result in itself.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Chronic heart failure (CHF) is the leading cause of hospitalization for those over the age of 65 and represents a significant clinical and economic burden.
About half of hospital re-admissions are related to co-morbidities, polypharmacy and disabilities associated with CHF.

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 40/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design	0 / 12	No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence	1 / 5	Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	1 / 5	2014 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	— / 7	No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year	— / 5	No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year	— / 6	No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here	— / 6	Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited	— / 4	No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record	— / 4	Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record	— / 3	No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multicenter collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 25593582)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Points	23 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100.
Total	40 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in End-of-life care from nearby years

Also tagged “palliative”

858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “palliative”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on End-of-life care

See all studies in End-of-life care →