ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Early Prediction of Cardiogenic Shock Using Machine Learning.
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 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prediction of Hospital Mortality in Patients with ST Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Evolution of Risk Measurement Techniques and Assessment of Their Effectiveness (Review).Sovremennye tekhnologii v meditsine · 2024Pooled it
- Development and validation of an in-hospital cardiogenic shock prediction model for AMI patients based on machine learning.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Cardiogenic Shock Detection Using Electronic Medical Records: A Review and Blueprint for Clinical Implementation and Future Research.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Review
- Development and external validation of a machine learning model for predicting 28-day mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by malignant arrhythmia: a study using the MIMIC database and a Chinese cohort.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Current and novel biomarkers in cardiogenic shock.European journal of heart failure · 2025Review
- Dynamic Predictive Models of Cardiogenic Shock in STEMI: Focus on Interventional and Critical Care Phases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of different AI systems for diagnosing sepsis, septic shock, and cardiogenic shock: a retrospective study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Temporary Mechanical Support in Cardiogenic Shock Secondary to Heart Failure: An Evolving Paradigm.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Profiling of Cardiogenic Shock: Incorporating Machine Learning Into Bedside Management.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Review
- The Heart of Transformation: Exploring Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Disease.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Impact of stress hyperglycemia ratio on incidence of in-hospital cardiogenic shock in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a prospective, multicenter study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Observational
- Prediction of Acute Kidney Injury for Critically Ill Cardiogenic Shock Patients with Machine Learning Algorithms.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Development and external validation of a dynamic risk score for early prediction of cardiogenic shock in cardiac intensive care units using machine learning.European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care · 2024Article
- Revolutionizing Cardiology through Artificial Intelligence-Big Data from Proactive Prevention to Precise Diagnostics and Cutting-Edge Treatment-A Comprehensive Review of the Past 5 Years.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Extension of an ICU-based noninvasive model to predict latent shock in the emergency department: an exploratory study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Review
- Early Recognition and Risk Stratification in Cardiogenic Shock: Well Begun Is Half Done.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a severe condition with in-hospital mortality of up to 50%. Patients who develop CS may have previous cardiac history, but that may not always be the case, adding to the challenges in optimally identifying and managing these patients. Patients may present to a medical facility with CS or develop CS while in the emergency department (ED), in a general inpatient ward (WARD) or in the critical care unit (CC). While different clinical pathways for management exist once CS is recognized, there are challenges in identifying the patients in a timely manner, in all settings, in a timeframe that will allow proper management. We therefore developed and evaluated retrospectively a machine learning model based on the XGBoost (XGB) algorithm which runs automatically on patient data from the electronic health record (EHR). The algorithm was trained on 8 years of de-identified data (from 2010 to 2017) collected from a large regional healthcare system. The input variables include demographics, vital signs, laboratory values, some orders, and specific pre-existing diagnoses. The model was designed to make predictions 2 h prior to the need of first CS intervention (inotrope, vasopressor, or mechanical circulatory support). The algorithm achieves an overall area under curve (AUC) of 0.87 (0.81 in CC, 0.84 in ED, 0.97 in WARD), which is considered useful for clinical use. The algorithm can be refined based on specific elements defining patient subpopulations, for example presence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or congestive heart failure (CHF), further increasing its precision when a patient has these conditions. The top-contributing risk factors learned by the model are consistent with existing clinical findings. Our conclusion is that a useful machine learning model can be used to predict the development of CS. This manuscript describes the main steps of the development process and our results.
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.