ArticleJMIR medical informatics2021
Machine Learning Methodologies for Prediction of Rhythm-Control Strategy in Patients Diagnosed With Atrial Fibrillation: Observational, Retrospective, Case-Control Study.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence for Precision Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: From Recurrence Prediction to Comparative Treatment Selection.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Multimodal Characterization of Atrial Fibrillation: From Patient-Specific Anatomy and Electrophysiology to Standardized Atrial Mapping.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Review
- Atrial Fibrillation Treatment Stratification Based on Artificial Intelligence-Driven Analysis of the Electrophysiological Complexity.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in atrial fibrillation: emerging applications, research directions and ethical considerations.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Quantitative Decision-Making for Rhythm Management of Atrial Fibrillation Using Tabular Q-Learning.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Article
- Interpretable Machine Learning Prediction of Drug-Induced QT Prolongation: Electronic Health Record Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Machine learning in the detection and management of atrial fibrillation.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2022Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe identification of an appropriate rhythm management strategy for patients diagnosed with atrial fibrillation (AF) remains a major challenge for providers. Although clinical trials have identified subgroups of patients in whom a rate- or rhythm-control strategy might be indicated to improve outcomes, the wide range of presentations and risk factors among patients presenting with AF makes such approaches challenging. The strength of electronic health records is the ability to build in logic to guide management decisions, such that the system can automatically identify patients in whom a rhythm-control strategy is more likely and can promote efficient referrals to specialists. However, like any clinical decision support tool, there is a balance between interpretability and accurate prediction.
objectiveThis study aims to create an electronic health record-based prediction tool to guide patient referral to specialists for rhythm-control management by comparing different machine learning algorithms.
methodsWe compared machine learning models of increasing complexity and used up to 50,845 variables to predict the rhythm-control strategy in 42,022 patients within the University of Colorado Health system at the time of AF diagnosis. Models were evaluated on the basis of their classification accuracy, defined by the F1 score and other metrics, and interpretability, captured by inspection of the relative importance of each predictor.
resultsWe found that age was by far the strongest single predictor of a rhythm-control strategy but that greater accuracy could be achieved with more complex models incorporating neural networks and more predictors for each participant. We determined that the impact of better prediction models was notable primarily in the rate of inappropriate referrals for rhythm-control, in which more complex models provided an average of 20% fewer inappropriate referrals than simpler, more interpretable models.
conclusionsWe conclude that any health care system seeking to incorporate algorithms to guide rhythm management for patients with AF will need to address this trade-off between prediction accuracy and model interpretability.
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.