ArticleScientific reports2023
Importance analysis of psychosociological variables in frailty syndrome in heart failure patients using machine learning approach.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of Conventional Artificial Intelligence Methods in the Identification of Frailty: A Scoping Review.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2026Article
- Integrating frailty and cumulative lipid burden for stroke risk stratification: a machine learning-guided Athero-Frailty Score from the CHARLS cohort.Lipids in health and disease · 2026Article
- State of the Art in Measuring Frailty in Patients With Heart Failure: from Diagnosis to Advanced Heart Failure.Current heart failure reports · 2025Review
- Prevalence of frailty and pre-frailty and related factors in older adults with cardio-cerebral vascular disease in China: a national cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 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
8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prevention and diagnosis of frailty syndrome (FS) in cardiac patients requires innovative systems to support medical personnel, patient adherence, and self-care behavior. To do so, modern medicine uses a supervised machine learning approach (ML) to study the psychosocial domains of frailty in cardiac patients with heart failure (HF). This study aimed to determine the absolute and relative diagnostic importance of the individual components of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) questionnaire in patients with HF. An exploratory analysis was performed using machine learning algorithms and the permutation method to determine the absolute importance of frailty components in HF. Based on the TFI data, which contain physical and psychosocial components, machine learning models were built based on three algorithms: a decision tree, a random decision forest, and the AdaBoost Models classifier. The absolute weights were used to make pairwise comparisons between the variables and obtain relative diagnostic importance. The analysis of HF patients' responses showed that the psychological variable TFI20 diagnosing low mood was more diagnostically important than the variables from the physical domain: lack of strength in the hands and physical fatigue. The psychological variable TFI21 linked with agitation and irritability was diagnostically more important than all three physical variables considered: walking difficulties, lack of hand strength, and physical fatigue. In the case of the two remaining variables from the psychological domain (TFI19, TFI22), and for all variables from the social domain, the results do not allow for the rejection of the null hypothesis. From a long-term perspective, the ML based frailty approach can support healthcare professionals, including psychologists and social workers, in drawing their attention to the non-physical origins of HF.
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.