Observational studyPloS one2021
A machine learning framework for the evaluation of myocardial rotation in patients with noncompaction cardiomyopathy.
Observational study in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsNoncompaction cardiomyopathy (NCC) is considered a genetic cardiomyopathy with unknown pathophysiological mechanisms. We propose to evaluate echocardiographic predictors for rigid body rotation (RBR) in NCC using a machine learning (ML) based model. METHODS AND
resultsForty-nine outpatients with NCC diagnosis by echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging (21 men, 42.8±14.8 years) were included. A comprehensive echocardiogram was performed. The layer-specific strain was analyzed from the apical two-, three, four-chamber views, short axis, and focused right ventricle views using 2D echocardiography (2DE) software. RBR was present in 44.9% of patients, and this group presented increased LV mass indexed (118±43.4 vs. 94.1±27.1g/m2, P = 0.034), LV end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (P< 0.001), E/e' (12.2±8.68 vs. 7.69±3.13, P = 0.034), and decreased LV ejection fraction (40.7±8.71 vs. 58.9±8.76%, P < 0.001) when compared to patients without RBR. Also, patients with RBR presented a significant decrease of global longitudinal, radial, and circumferential strain. When ML model based on a random forest algorithm and a neural network model was applied, it found that twist, NC/C, torsion, LV ejection fraction, and diastolic dysfunction are the strongest predictors to RBR with accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve of 0.93, 0.99, 0.80, and 0.88, respectively.
conclusionIn this study, a random forest algorithm was capable of selecting the best echocardiographic predictors to RBR pattern in NCC patients, which was consistent with worse systolic, diastolic, and myocardium deformation indices. Prospective studies are warranted to evaluate the role of this tool for NCC risk stratification.
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.