ArticlePloS one2022
An evolutionary machine learning algorithm for cardiovascular disease risk prediction.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Future promise, current clinical ambiguity: a systematic review of machine learning algorithm outputs predicting risk of cardiovascular disease.Open heart · 2026Pooled it
- Deep learning for cardiovascular disease: a comprehensive review of detection and risk forecasting.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Review
- Risk prediction for cardiovascular related diseases using PRS and EHR in the Framingham Heart Study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Comparative performance of machine learning and deep learning models for heart disease prediction in a small clinical dataset.American journal of cardiovascular disease · 2026Article
- Article
- Integrated deep learning for cardiovascular risk assessment and diagnosis: An evolutionary mating algorithm-enhanced CNN-LSTM.MethodsX · 2025Article
- Article
- Optimising test intervals for individuals with type 2 diabetes: A machine learning approach.PloS one · 2025Article
- Detecting cardiovascular diseases using unsupervised machine learning clustering based on electronic medical records.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- The Role of Visualization in Estimating Cardiovascular Disease Risk: Scoping Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Polygenic Risk Score for Cardiovascular Diseases in Artificial Intelligence Paradigm: A Review.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Review
- Prospects of evolution-based artificial intelligence models in genome-wide studies to stratify genetic risk variants in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study developed a novel risk assessment model to predict the occurrence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. It uses a Genetic Algorithm (GA) to develop an easy-to-use model with high accuracy, calibrated based on the Isfahan Cohort Study (ICS) database.
methodsThe ICS was a population-based prospective cohort study of 6,504 healthy Iranian adults aged ≥ 35 years followed for incident CVD over ten years, from 2001 to 2010. To develop a risk score, the problem of predicting CVD was solved using a well-designed GA, and finally, the results were compared with classic machine learning (ML) and statistical methods.
resultsA number of risk scores such as the WHO, and PARS models were utilized as the baseline for comparison due to their similar chart-based models. The Framingham and PROCAM models were also applied to the dataset, with the area under a Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (AUROC) equal to 0.633 and 0.683, respectively. However, the more complex Deep Learning model using a three-layered Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) performed best among the ML models, with an AUROC of 0.74, and the GA-based eXplanaible Persian Atherosclerotic CVD Risk Stratification (XPARS) showed higher performance compared to the statistical methods. XPARS with eight features showed an AUROC of 0.76, and the XPARS with four features, showed an AUROC of 0.72.
conclusionA risk model that is extracted using GA substantially improves the prediction of CVD compared to conventional methods. It is clear, interpretable and can be a suitable replacement for conventional statistical methods.
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.