Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34480134›Full record

ArticleHypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension2021

Identifying the predictive effectiveness of a genetic risk score for incident hypertension using machine learning methods among populations in rural China.

Miaomiao Niu, Yikang Wang, Liying Zhang, Runqi Tu, Xiaotian Liu, Jian Hou, Wenqian Huo, Zhenxing Mao, Chongjian Wang, Ronghai Bie

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Miaomiao NiuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, PR China.
Yikang WangDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, PR China.
Liying ZhangSchool of Information Engineering, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, PR China.
Runqi TuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, PR China.
Xiaotian LiuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, PR China.
Jian HouDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, PR China.
Wenqian HuoDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, PR China.
Zhenxing MaoDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, PR China.
Chongjian WangDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, PR China. tjwcj2008@zzu.edu.cn.
Ronghai BieDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, PR China. bierh2012@126.com.
Zhengzhou University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current studies have shown the controversial effect of genetic risk scores (GRSs) in hypertension prediction. Machine learning methods are used extensively in the medical field but rarely in the mining of genetic information. This study aims to determine whether genetic information can improve the prediction of incident hypertension using machine learning approaches in a prospective study. The study recruited 4592 subjects without hypertension at baseline from a cohort study conducted in rural China. A polygenic risk score (PGGRS) was calculated using 13 SNPs. According to a ratio of 7:3, subjects were randomly allocated to the train and test datasets. Models with and without the PGGRS were established using the train dataset with Cox regression, artificial neural network (ANN), random forest (RF), and gradient boosting machine (GBM) methods. The discrimination and reclassification of models were estimated using the test dataset. The PGGRS showed a significant association with the risk of incident hypertension (HR (95% CI), 1.046 (1.004, 1.090), P = 0.031) irrespective of baseline blood pressure. Models that did not include the PGGRS achieved AUCs (95% CI) of 0.785 (0.763, 0.807), 0.790 (0.768, 0.811), 0.838 (0.817, 0.857), and 0.854 (0.835, 0.873) for the Cox, ANN, RF, and GBM methods, respectively. The addition of the PGGRS led to the improvement of the AUC by 0.001, 0.008, 0.023, and 0.017; IDI by 1.39%, 2.86%, 4.73%, and 4.68%; and NRI by 25.05%, 13.01%, 44.87%, and 22.94%, respectively. Incident hypertension risk was better predicted by the traditional+PGGRS model, especially when machine learning approaches were used, suggesting that genetic information may have the potential to identify new hypertension cases using machine learning methods in resource-limited areas. CLINICAL

trial registrationThe Henan Rural Cohort Study has been registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Register (Registration number: ChiCTR-OOC-15006699). http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=11375 .

Indexed as

HypertensionMachine LearningChinaCohort StudiesHumansProspective StudiesRisk FactorsRural PopulationGenetic factorIncident hypertensionPredictive performanceRisk model

Identifiers

PMID34480134
OpenAlexW3198786170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.