SynthesisPloS one2021
Applications of machine learning to undifferentiated chest pain in the emergency department: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient Stratification for Improving Acute Chest Pain Management and Mitigating Emergency Department Crowding: Machine Learning Model Development and Validation.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Use of machine learning for risk stratification of chest pain patients in the emergency department.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Article
- Predictors of left atrial appendage thrombus in atrial fibrillation patients undergoing cardioversion.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2024Article
- Machine-Learning for Phenotyping and Prognostication of Myocardial Infarction and Injury in Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
- The skåne emergency medicine (SEM) cohort.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Review
- Applications of natural language processing at emergency department triage: A narrative review.PloS one · 2023Review
- Risk stratification of patients who present with chest pain and have normal troponins using a machine learning model.World journal of cardiology · 2022Article
- Prehospital diagnostic algorithm for acute coronary syndrome using machine learning: a prospective observational study.Scientific reports · 2022Observational
- Predicting Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Scoping Review of Machine Learning Approaches.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Article
- Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and deep learning for clinical outcome prediction.Emerging topics in life sciences · 2021Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChest pain is amongst the most common reason for presentation to the emergency department (ED). There are many causes of chest pain, and it is important for the emergency physician to quickly and accurately diagnose life threatening causes such as acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Multiple clinical decision tools have been developed to assist clinicians in risk stratifying patients with chest. There is growing recognition that machine learning (ML) will have a significant impact on the practice of medicine in the near future and may assist with diagnosis and risk stratification. This systematic review aims to evaluate how ML has been applied to adults presenting to the ED with undifferentiated chest pain and assess if ML models show improved performance when compared to physicians or current risk stratification techniques. METHODS AND
findingsWe conducted a systematic review of journal articles that applied a ML technique to an adult patient presenting to an emergency department with undifferentiated chest pain. Multiple databases were searched from inception through to November 2020. In total, 3361 articles were screened, and 23 articles were included. We did not conduct a metanalysis due to a high level of heterogeneity between studies in both their methods, and reporting. The most common primary outcomes assessed were diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (12 studies), and prognosis of major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (6 studies). There were 14 retrospective studies and 5 prospective studies. Four studies reported the development of a machine learning model retrospectively then tested it prospectively. The most common machine learning methods used were artificial neural networks (14 studies), random forest (6 studies), support vector machine (5 studies), and gradient boosting (2 studies). Multiple studies achieved high accuracy in both the diagnosis of AMI in the ED setting, and in predicting mortality and composite outcomes over various timeframes. ML outperformed existing risk stratification scores in all cases, and physicians in three out of four cases. The majority of studies were single centre, retrospective, and without prospective or external validation. There were only 3 studies that were considered low risk of bias and had low applicability concerns. Two studies reported integrating the ML model into clinical practice.
conclusionsResearch on applications of ML for undifferentiated chest pain in the ED has been ongoing for decades. ML has been reported to outperform emergency physicians and current risk stratification tools to diagnose AMI and predict MACE but has rarely been integrated into practice. Many studies assessing the use of ML in undifferentiated chest pain in the ED have a high risk of bias. It is important that future studies make use of recently developed standardised ML reporting guidelines, register their protocols, and share their datasets and code. Future work is required to assess the impact of ML model implementation on clinical decision making, patient orientated outcomes, and patient and physician acceptability.
trial registrationInternational Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews registration number: CRD42020184977.
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.