Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35251153›Full record

ArticleComputational intelligence and neuroscience2022

Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence Models for Cardiovascular Disease Prediction: Network Meta-Analysis.

Yahia Baashar, Gamal Alkawsi, Hitham Alhussian, Luiz Fernando Capretz, Ayed Alwadain, Ammar Ahmed Alkahtani, Malek Almomani

Abstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Article in Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. [Advances in heart failure clinical research based on deep learning].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

7 authors.

Yahia BaasharCollege of Graduate Studies, Universiti Tenaga Nasional (UNITEN), Selangor, Malaysia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8004-3929
Gamal AlkawsiFaculty of Computer Science and Information Systems, Thamar University, Thamar, Yemen.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2456-4033
Hitham AlhussianDepartment of Computer and Information Sciences, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Seri Iskandar, Malaysia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3947-269X
Luiz Fernando CapretzDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Western University, London, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6966-2369
Ayed AlwadainComputer Science Department, Community College, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5104-372X
Ammar Ahmed AlkahtaniInstitute of Sustainable Energy, Universiti Tenaga Nasional (UNITEN), Selangor, Malaysia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2067-9519
Malek AlmomaniDepartment of Software Engineering, The World Islamic Sciences and Education University, Amman, Jordan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3890-9792

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Heart failure is the most common cause of death in both males and females around the world. Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), in particular, are the main cause of death worldwide, accounting for 30% of all fatalities in the United States and 45% in Europe. Artificial intelligence (AI) approaches such as machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) models are playing an important role in the advancement of heart failure therapy. The main objective of this study was to perform a network meta-analysis of patients with heart failure, stroke, hypertension, and diabetes by comparing the ML and DL models. A comprehensive search of five electronic databases was performed using ScienceDirect, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore. The search strategy was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The methodological quality of studies was assessed by following the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) guidelines. The random-effects network meta-analysis forest plot with categorical data was used, as were subgroups testing for all four types of treatments and calculating odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Pooled network forest, funnel plots, and the league table, which show the best algorithms for each outcome, were analyzed. Seventeen studies, with a total of 285,213 patients with CVDs, were included in the network meta-analysis. The statistical evidence indicated that the DL algorithms performed well in the prediction of heart failure with AUC of 0.843 and CI [0.840-0.845], while in the ML algorithm, the gradient boosting machine (GBM) achieved an average accuracy of 91.10% in predicting heart failure. An artificial neural network (ANN) performed well in the prediction of diabetes with an OR and CI of 0.0905 [0.0489; 0.1673]. Support vector machine (SVM) performed better for the prediction of stroke with OR and CI of 25.0801 [11.4824; 54.7803]. Random forest (RF) results performed well in the prediction of hypertension with OR and CI of 10.8527 [4.7434; 24.8305]. The findings of this work suggest that the DL models can effectively advance the prediction of and knowledge about heart failure, but there is a lack of literature regarding DL methods in the field of CVDs. As a result, more DL models should be applied in this field. To confirm our findings, more meta-analysis (e.g., Bayesian network) and thorough research with a larger number of patients are encouraged.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCardiovascular DiseasesBayes TheoremFemaleHumansMachine LearningMale

Identifiers

PMID35251153
PMCPMC8894073

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.