ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2022
A machine learning-based risk warning platform for potentially inappropriate prescriptions for elderly patients with cardiovascular disease.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integration of artificial intelligence applications in clinical pharmacy services: A scoping review.Future healthcare journal · 2026Review
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Medication Management for Older Adults: A Systematic Review.Aging medicine (Milton (N.S.W)) · 2026Review
- Predicting rapid kidney function decline in middle-aged and elderly Chinese adults using machine learning techniques.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Construction and validation of a meropenem-induced liver injury risk prediction model: a multicenter case-control study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Article
- Development of a Predictive Model for Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Older Patients with Cardiovascular Disease.Drugs & aging · 2024Article
- Machine learning-based prediction model for the efficacy and safety of statins.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence in the field of pharmacy practice: A literature review.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2023Review
- [Knowledge Graph-Based Prediction of Potentially Inappropriate Medication].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2023Article
- Automated Detection of Patients at High Risk of Polypharmacy including Anticholinergic and Sedative Medications.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Development and assessment of novel machine learning models to predict the probability of postoperative nausea and vomiting for patient-controlled analgesia.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A personalized prediction model for urinary tract infections in type 2 diabetes mellitus using machine learning.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence in clinical pharmacy-A systematic review of current scenario and future perspectives.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP), including potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs), is a major risk factor for adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Establishing a risk warning model for PIP to screen high-risk patients and implementing targeted interventions would significantly reduce the occurrence of PIP and adverse drug events. Elderly patients with cardiovascular disease hospitalized at the Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital were included in the study. Information about PIP, PIM, and PPO was obtained by reviewing patient prescriptions according to the STOPP/START criteria (2nd edition). Data were divided into a training set and test set at a ratio of 8:2. Five sampling methods, three feature screening methods, and eighteen machine learning algorithms were used to handle data and establish risk warning models. A 10-fold cross-validation method was employed for internal validation in the training set, and the bootstrap method was used for external validation in the test set. The performances were assessed by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and the risk warning platform was developed based on the best models. The contributions of features were interpreted using SHapley Additive ExPlanation (SHAP). A total of 404 patients were included in the study (318 [78.7%] with PIP; 112 [27.7%] with PIM; and 273 [67.6%] with PPO). After data sampling and feature selection, 15 datasets were obtained and 270 risk warning models were built based on them to predict PIP, PPO, and PIM, respectively. External validation showed that the AUCs of the best model for PIP, PPO, and PIM were 0.8341, 0.7007, and 0.7061, respectively. The results suggested that angina, number of medications, number of diseases, and age were the key factors in the PIP risk warning model. The risk warning platform was established to predict PIP, PIM, and PPO, which has acceptable accuracy, prediction performance, and potential clinical application perspective.
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.