Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35647052›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022

Predicting the Prognosis of Patients in the Coronary Care Unit: A Novel Multi-Category Machine Learning Model Using XGBoost.

Xingchen Wang, Tianqi Zhu, Minghong Xia, Yu Liu, Yao Wang, Xizhi Wang, Lenan Zhuang, Danfeng Zhong, Jun Zhu, Hong He and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

13 authors.

Xingchen WangKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Tianqi ZhuCollege of Biomedical Engineering and Instrument Science, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Minghong XiaKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Yu LiuKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Yao WangKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Xizhi WangKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Lenan ZhuangKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Danfeng ZhongKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Jun ZhuKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Hong HeKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Shaoxiang WengKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Junhui ZhuKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Dongwu LaiKey Laboratory of Cardiovascular Intervention and Regenerative Medicine of Zhejiang Province, Department of Cardiology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Early prediction and classification of prognosis is essential for patients in the coronary care unit (CCU). We applied a machine learning (ML) model using the eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) algorithm to prognosticate CCU patients and compared XGBoost with traditional classification models. Methods: CCU patients' data were extracted from the MIMIC-III v1.4 clinical database, and divided into four groups based on the time to death: <30 days, 30 days-1 year, 1-5 years, and ≥5 years. Four classification models, including XGBoost, naïve Bayes (NB), logistic regression (LR), and support vector machine (SVM) were constructed using the Python software. These four models were tested and compared for accuracy, F1 score, Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC), and area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curves. Subsequently, Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations method was performed to improve XGBoost model interpretability. We also constructed sub-models of each model based on the different categories of death time and compared the differences by decision curve analysis. The optimal model was further analyzed using a clinical impact curve. At last, feature ablation curves of the XGBoost model were conducted to obtain the simplified model. Results: Overall, 5360 CCU patients were included. Compared to NB, LR, and SVM, the XGBoost model showed better accuracy (0.663, 0.605, 0.632, and 0.622), micro-AUCs (0.873, 0.811, 0.841, and 0.818), and MCC (0.337, 0.317, 0.250, and 0.182). In subgroup analysis, the XGBoost model had a better predictive performance in acute myocardial infarction subgroup. The decision curve and clinical impact curve analyses verified the clinical utility of the XGBoost model for different categories of patients. Finally, we obtained a simplified model with thirty features. Conclusions: For CCU physicians, the ML technique by XGBoost is a potential predictive tool in patients with different conditions, and it may contribute to improvements in prognosis.

Indexed as

coronary care unit (CCU)machine learningMIMIC-IIImulti-categoryprognosisXGBoost

Identifiers

PMID35647052
PMCPMC9133425

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.