ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Predicting the Prognosis of Patients in the Coronary Care Unit: A Novel Multi-Category Machine Learning Model Using XGBoost.
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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Validation of an XGBoost-SHAP Model for Predicting Adverse Outcomes in Elderly Cardiovascular Patients With Polypharmacy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2026Article
- Machine learning prediction for menopause women with low bone mass: a multicenter and retrospective study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A Public Health Approach to Automated Pain Intensity Recognition in Chest Pain Patients via Facial Expression Analysis for Emergency Care Prioritization.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Dynamic Prediction of Treatment Failure in Ocular Tuberculosis Using Machine Learning and Explainable AI.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Automatic Feature Selection for Imbalanced Echocardiogram Data Using Event-Based Self-Similarity.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Developing a high-performance AI model for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage mortality prediction using machine learning in ICU settings.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Machine learning algorithms to predict heart failure with preserved ejection fraction among patients with premature myocardial infarction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- The Potential for High-Priority Care Based on Pain Through Facial Expression Detection with Patients Experiencing Chest Pain.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Machine learning models for predicting risks of MACEs for myocardial infarction patients with different VEGFR2 genotypes.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- What Is Machine Learning, Artificial Neural Networks and Deep Learning?-Examples of Practical Applications in Medicine.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Machine learning-based in-hospital mortality risk prediction tool for intensive care unit patients with heart failure.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Research on nonstroke dementia screening and cognitive function prediction model for older people based on brain atrophy characteristics.Brain and behavior · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.