Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35171443›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2022

Artificial Intelligence to Improve Risk Prediction with Nuclear Cardiac Studies.

Luis Eduardo Juarez-Orozco, Riku Klén, Mikael Niemi, Bram Ruijsink, Gustavo Daquarti, Rene van Es, Jan-Walter Benjamins, Ming Wai Yeung, Pim van der Harst, Juhani Knuuti

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiology reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Artificial intelligence in nuclear cardiology: your crucial role in transforming potential into reality.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023
    Article
  7. 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 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Luis Eduardo Juarez-OrozcoDepartment of Cardiology, Division Heart & Lungs, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Riku KlénTurku PET Centre, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Kiinamyllynkatu 4-8, 20520, Turku, Finland.
Mikael NiemiTurku PET Centre, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Kiinamyllynkatu 4-8, 20520, Turku, Finland.
Bram RuijsinkDepartment of Cardiology, Division Heart & Lungs, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Gustavo DaquartiDepartment of Artificial Intelligence, UMA-Health, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Rene van EsDepartment of Cardiology, Division Heart & Lungs, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Jan-Walter BenjaminsDepartment of Cardiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Ming Wai YeungDepartment of Cardiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Pim van der HarstDepartment of Cardiology, Division Heart & Lungs, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Juhani KnuutiTurku PET Centre, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Kiinamyllynkatu 4-8, 20520, Turku, Finland. Juhani.Knuuti@tyks.fi.
Turku PET Centre · FIUtrecht University · NLKing's College London · GBTurku University Hospital · FIUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NLUniversity of Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewAs machine learning-based artificial intelligence (AI) continues to revolutionize the way in which we analyze data, the field of nuclear cardiology provides fertile ground for the implementation of these complex analytics. This review summarizes and discusses the principles regarding nuclear cardiology techniques and AI, and the current evidence regarding its performance and contribution to the improvement of risk prediction in cardiovascular disease. There is a growing body of evidence on the experimentation with and implementation of machine learning-based AI on nuclear cardiology studies both concerning SPECT and PET technology for the improvement of risk-of-disease (classification of disease) and risk-of-events (prediction of adverse events) estimations. These publications still report objective divergence in methods either utilizing statistical machine learning approaches or deep learning with varying architectures, dataset sizes, and performance. Recent efforts have been placed into bringing standardization and quality to the experimentation and application of machine learning-based AI in cardiovascular imaging to generate standards in data harmonization and analysis through AI. Machine learning-based AI offers the possibility to improve risk evaluation in cardiovascular disease through its implementation on cardiac nuclear studies. AI in improving risk evaluation in nuclear cardiology. * Based on the 2019 ESC guidelines.

Indexed as

CardiologyCardiovascular DiseasesArtificial IntelligenceHumansMachine LearningArtificial intelligenceDeep learningNuclear cardiologyRisk prediction

Identifiers

PMID35171443
PMCPMC8852880
OpenAlexW4212822112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.