ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2022
From population- to patient-based prediction of in-hospital mortality in heart failure using machine learning.
Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of machine learning algorithms for mortality risk, readmission and phenotype prediction in patients with heart failure: exploring key data sources, input variables and outcomes.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Pooled it
- Identification and clinical evaluation of diagnostic biomarkers for ischemic cardiomyopathy based on machine learning and transcriptomics.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Adopting artificial intelligence in cardiovascular medicine: a scoping review.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024Article
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
Aims: Utilizing administrative data may facilitate risk prediction in heart failure inpatients. In this short report, we present different machine learning models that predict in-hospital mortality on an individual basis utilizing this widely available data source. Methods and results: Inpatient cases with a main discharge diagnosis of heart failure hospitalized between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2018 in one of 86 German Helios hospitals were examined. Comorbidities were defined by ICD-10 codes from administrative data. The data set was randomly split into 75/25% portions for model development and testing. Five algorithms were evaluated: logistic regression [generalized linear models (GLMs)], random forest (RF), gradient boosting machine (GBM), single-layer neural network (NNET), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost). After model tuning, the receiver operating characteristics area under the curves (ROC AUCs) were calculated and compared with DeLong's test. A total of 59 074 inpatient cases (mean age 77.6 ± 11.1 years, 51.9% female, 89.4% NYHA Class III/IV) were included and in-hospital mortality was 6.2%. In the test data set, calculated ROC AUCs were 0.853 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.842-0.863] for GLM, 0.851 (95% CI 0.840-0.862) for RF, 0.855 (95% CI 0.844-0.865) for GBM, 0.836 (95% CI 0.823-0.849) for NNET, and 0.856 (95% CI 9.846-0.867) for XGBoost. XGBoost outperformed all models except GBM. Conclusion: Machine learning-based processing of administrative data enables the creation of well-performing prediction models for in-hospital mortality in heart failure patients.
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.