Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35442202›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2022

Risk Prediction of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events Occurrence Within 6 Months After Coronary Revascularization: Machine Learning Study.

Jinwan Wang, Shuai Wang, Mark Xuefang Zhu, Tao Yang, Qingfeng Yin, Ya Hou

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 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
3.8field-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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jinwan Wang *School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6000-0091
Shuai Wang *First Department of Cardiology, The Affiliated Hospital of Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shenyang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2945-6063
Mark Xuefang ZhuSchool of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8244-5999
Tao YangSchool of Artificial Intelligence and Information Technology, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9537-0500
Qingfeng YinJiangsu Famous Medical Technology Co Ltd, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3131-5609
Ya HouJiangsu Famous Medical Technology Co Ltd, Nanjing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9231-6042
Nanjing University · CNAffiliated Hospital of Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNNanjing University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs a major health hazard, the incidence of coronary heart disease has been increasing year by year. Although coronary revascularization, mainly percutaneous coronary intervention, has played an important role in the treatment of coronary heart disease, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) such as recurrent or persistent angina pectoris after coronary revascularization remain a very difficult problem in clinical practice.

objectiveGiven the high probability of MACE after coronary revascularization, the aim of this study was to develop and validate a predictive model for MACE occurrence within 6 months based on machine learning algorithms.

methodsA retrospective study was performed including 1004 patients who had undergone coronary revascularization at The People's Hospital of Liaoning Province and Affiliated Hospital of Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine from June 2019 to December 2020. According to the characteristics of available data, an oversampling strategy was adopted for initial preprocessing. We then employed six machine learning algorithms, including decision tree, random forest, logistic regression, naïve Bayes, support vector machine, and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), to develop prediction models for MACE depending on clinical information and 6-month follow-up information. Among all samples, 70% were randomly selected for training and the remaining 30% were used for model validation. Model performance was assessed based on accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, confusion matrix, area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), and visualization of the ROC curve.

resultsUnivariate analysis showed that 21 patient characteristic variables were statistically significant (P<.05) between the groups without and with MACE. Coupled with these significant factors, among the six machine learning algorithms, XGBoost stood out with an accuracy of 0.7788, precision of 0.8058, recall of 0.7345, F1-score of 0.7685, and AUC of 0.8599. Further exploration of the models to identify factors affecting the occurrence of MACE revealed that use of anticoagulant drugs and course of the disease consistently ranked in the top two predictive factors in three developed models.

conclusionsThe machine learning risk models constructed in this study can achieve acceptable performance of MACE prediction, with XGBoost performing the best, providing a valuable reference for pointed intervention and clinical decision-making in MACE prevention.

Indexed as

data imbalancemachine learningmajor adverse cardiovascular eventsoversamplingrisk prediction

Identifiers

PMID35442202
PMCPMC9069286
OpenAlexW4224267054

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.