Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37492161›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023

Tree-based survival analysis improves mortality prediction in cardiac surgery.

Jahan C Penny-Dimri, Christoph Bergmeir, Christopher M Reid, Jenni Williams-Spence, Luke A Perry, Julian A Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Hand movements prediction via fNIRS and AI algorithms.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jahan C Penny-DimriDepartment of Surgery, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Christoph BergmeirDepartment of Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Christopher M ReidDepartment of Surgery, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Jenni Williams-SpenceDepartment of Surgery, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Luke A PerryDepartment of Anaesthesia, Victorian Heart Hospital, Monash Health, Clayton, Vic, Australia.
Julian A SmithDepartment of Surgery, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Machine learning (ML) classification tools are known to accurately predict many cardiac surgical outcomes. A novel approach, ML-based survival analysis, remains unstudied for predicting mortality after cardiac surgery. We aimed to benchmark performance, as measured by the concordance index (C-index), of tree-based survival models against Cox proportional hazards (CPH) modeling and explore risk factors using the best-performing model. Methods: 144,536 patients with 147,301 surgery events from the Australian and New Zealand Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons (ANZSCTS) national database were used to train and validate models. Univariate analysis was performed using Student's T-test for continuous variables, Chi-squared test for categorical variables, and stratified Kaplan-Meier estimation of the survival function. Three ML models were tested, a decision tree (DT), random forest (RF), and gradient boosting machine (GBM). Hyperparameter tuning was performed using a Bayesian search strategy. Performance was assessed using 2-fold cross-validation repeated 5 times. Results: The highest performing model was the GBM with a C-index of 0.803 (0.002), followed by RF with 0.791 (0.003), DT with 0.729 (0.014), and finally CPH with 0.596 (0.042). The 5 most predictive features were age, type of procedure, length of hospital stay, drain output in the first 4 h (ml), and inotrope use greater than 4 h postoperatively. Conclusion: Tree-based learning for survival analysis is a non-parametric and performant alternative to CPH modeling. GBMs offer interpretable modeling of non-linear relationships, promising to expose the most relevant risk factors and uncover new questions to guide future research.

Indexed as

cardiac surgerymachine learningmortalitysurvival analaysistree-based machine learning

Identifiers

PMID37492161
PMCPMC10365268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.