ArticleJournal of diabetes and metabolic disorders2023
Machine learning framework for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk assessment.
Article in Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the Current Tools in Cardiovascular Risk Assessment in the Middle East and the Need for Region-Specific Models - A Scoping Review.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2025Review
- Age-Specific Cardiovascular Risk Factors for Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Patients Undergoing Myocardial Perfusion Imaging.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 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 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is the first leading cause of mortality globally. To identify the individual risk factors of ASCVD utilizing the machine learning (ML) approaches. Materials & methods: This cohort-based cross-sectional study was conducted on data of 500 participants with ASCVD among Tabriz University Medical Sciences employees, during 2020. The data with ML methods were developed and validated to predict ASCVD risk with naive Bayes (NB), spurt vesture machines (SVM), regression tree (RT), k-nearest neighbors (KNN), artificial neural networks (ANN), generalized additive models (GAM), and logistic regression (LR). Results: Accuracy of the models ranged from 95.7 to 98.1%, with a sensitivity of 50.0 to 97.3%, specificity of 74.3 to 99.1%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.0 to 98.0%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 68.4 to 100.0%, positive likelihood ratio (LR +) of 13.8 to 96.4%, negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of 3.6 to 51.9%, and area under ROC curve (AUC) of 62.5 to 99.4%. The ANN fit the data best with an accuracy of 98.1% (95% CI: 96.5-99.1), a specificity of 99.1% (95% CI: 97.7-99.9), a LR + of 96.4% (95% CI: 36.2-258.8), and AUC of 99.4% (95% CI: 85.2-97.0). Based on the optimal model, sex (females), age, smoking, and metabolic syndrome were shown to be the most important risk factors of ASCVD. Conclusion: Sex (females), age, smoking, and metabolic syndrome were predictors obtained by ANN. Considering the ANN as the optimal model identified, more accurate prevention planning may be designed.
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.