ArticleMolecular biology reports2018
Machine learning algorithm-based risk prediction model of coronary artery disease.
Article in Molecular biology reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Coronary Artery Disease Using Clinical and Behavioral Data: A Comparative Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Genetic Factors Associated With Myocardial Infarction in Saudi Arabia.Journal of the Saudi Heart Association · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in healthcare: a scoping review of perceived threats to patient rights and safety.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024Article
- Association Between Serine Concentration and Coronary Heart Disease: A Case-Control Study.International journal of general medicine · 2024Article
- Diagnosing Coronary Artery Disease on the Basis of Hard Ensemble Voting Optimization.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Current and Future Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Coronary Artery Disease.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Selection of 51 predictors from 13,782 candidate multimodal features using machine learning improves coronary artery disease prediction.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2021Article
- Use of machine learning in geriatric clinical care for chronic diseases: a systematic literature review.JAMIA open · 2020Review
- Probing the epigenetic signatures in subjects with coronary artery disease.Molecular biology reports · 2020Article
- Development of non-invasive diabetes risk prediction models as decision support tools designed for application in the dental clinical environment.Informatics in medicine unlocked · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
In view of high mortality associated with coronary artery disease (CAD), development of an early predicting tool will be beneficial in reducing the burden of the disease. The database comprising demographic, conventional, folate/xenobiotic genetic risk factors of 648 subjects (364 cases of CAD and 284 healthy controls) was used as the basis to develop CAD risk and percentage stenosis prediction models using ensemble machine learning algorithms (EMLA), multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) and recursive partitioning (RP). The EMLA model showed better performance than other models in disease (89.3%) and stenosis prediction (82.5%). This model depicted hypertension and alcohol intake as the key predictors of CAD risk followed by cSHMT C1420T, GCPII C1561T, diabetes, GSTT1, CYP1A1 m2, TYMs 5'-UTR 28 bp tandem repeat and MTRR A66G. MDR and RP models are in agreement in projecting increasing age, hypertension and cSHMTC1420T as the key determinants interacting in modulating CAD risk. Receiver operating characteristic curves exhibited clinical utility of the developed models in the following order: EMLA (C = 0.96) > RP (C = 0.83) > MDR (C = 0.80). The stenosis prediction model showed that xenobiotic pathway genetic variants i.e. CYP1A1 m2 and GSTT1 are the key determinants of percentage of stenosis. Diabetes, diet, alcohol intake, hypertension and MTRR A66G are the other determinants of stenosis. These eleven variables contribute towards 82.5% stenosis. To conclude, the EMLA model exhibited higher predictability both in terms of disease prediction and stenosis prediction. This can be attributed to higher number of iterations in EMLA model that can increase the prediction accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.