ArticleScientific reports2021
Machine learning and deep learning to predict mortality in patients with spontaneous coronary artery dissection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- Harnessing Machine Learning, a Subset of Artificial Intelligence, for Early Detection and Diagnosis of Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Comparative study on the predictive value of PNI and GNRI for all-cause mortality rates of elderly patients in cardiac care unit and cardiovascular intensive care unit.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2026Observational
- Article
- Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Three-Year Heart Failure and Mortality After Premature Ventricular Contraction Ablation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Risk factors and predictive performance for first healthcare encounter indicating homelessness using administrative data among Calgary residents diagnosed with addiction or mental health conditions.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Women's Cardiovascular Disease Care.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- Vascular senescence and aging: mechanisms, clinical implications, and therapeutic prospects.Biogerontology · 2025Review
- Machine learning predictive model for aspiration risk in early enteral nutrition patients with severe acute pancreatitis.Heliyon · 2024Article
- 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
- Causes of death in individuals with lifetime major depression: a comprehensive machine learning analysis from a community-based autopsy center.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- Factors of acute respiratory infection among under-five children across sub-Saharan African countries using machine learning approaches.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence for cardiovascular disease risk assessment in personalised framework: a scoping review.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Application of machine learning methods for predicting under-five mortality: analysis of Nigerian demographic health survey 2018 dataset.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Article
- Machine learning risk estimation and prediction of death in continuing care facilities using administrative data.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Risk Prediction Models for Peri-Operative Mortality in Patients Undergoing Major Vascular Surgery with Particular Focus on Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder based on functional brain networks and machine learning.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Comparison of correctly and incorrectly classified patients for in-hospital mortality prediction in the intensive care unit.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Deep Learning for Echocardiography: Introduction for Clinicians and Future Vision: State-of-the-Art Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Insights and perspectives into clinical biomarker discovery in pediatric heart failure and congenital heart disease-a narrative review.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) can successfully predict high prevalence events in very large databases (big data), but the value of this methodology for risk prediction in smaller cohorts with uncommon diseases and infrequent events is uncertain. The clinical course of spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is variable, and no reliable methods are available to predict mortality. Based on the hypothesis that machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) techniques could enhance the identification of patients at risk, we applied a deep neural network to information available in electronic health records (EHR) to predict in-hospital mortality in patients with SCAD. We extracted patient data from the EHR of an extensive urban health system and applied several ML and DL models using candidate clinical variables potentially associated with mortality. We partitioned the data into training and evaluation sets with cross-validation. We estimated model performance based on the area under the receiver-operator characteristics curve (AUC) and balanced accuracy. As sensitivity analyses, we examined results limited to cases with complete clinical information available. We identified 375 SCAD patients of which mortality during the index hospitalization was 11.5%. The best-performing DL algorithm identified in-hospital mortality with AUC 0.98 (95% CI 0.97-0.99), compared to other ML models (P < 0.0001). For prediction of mortality using ML models in patients with SCAD, the AUC ranged from 0.50 with the random forest method (95% CI 0.41-0.58) to 0.95 with the AdaBoost model (95% CI 0.93-0.96), with intermediate performance using logistic regression, decision tree, support vector machine, K-nearest neighbors, and extreme gradient boosting methods. A deep neural network model was associated with higher predictive accuracy and discriminative power than logistic regression or ML models for identification of patients with ACS due to SCAD prone to early mortality.
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.