SynthesisHeart failure reviews2024
Artificial intelligence models in prediction of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Heart failure reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Enhancing Anesthetic Depth Assessment via Unsupervised Machine Learning in Processed Electroencephalography Analysis: Novel Methodological Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Deep Learning-Based Prediction Model for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Responders Using Electrocardiogram Data.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2026Article
- Machine Learning-Based Risk Stratification for Sudden Cardiac Death Using Clinical and Device-Derived Data.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: Diagnostics, Monitoring, and Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Improving Risk Stratification in Sudden Cardiac Death Using Interpretable Machine Learning: A Clinical Perspective.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- How to Design, Create, and Evaluate an Instruction-Tuning Dataset for Large Language Model Training in Health Care: Tutorial From a Clinical Perspective.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in neurodegenerative diseases research: a bibliometric analysis since 2000.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Machine learning-based prediction of 1-year all-cause mortality in patients undergoing CRT implantation: validation of the SEMMELWEIS-CRT score in the European CRT Survey I dataset.European heart journal. Digital health · 2024Article
- Machine learning of ECG waveforms and cardiac magnetic resonance for response and survival after cardiac resynchronization therapy.Computers in biology and medicine · 2024Article
- Machine Learning and Deep Learning Methods for Fast and Accurate Assessment of Transthoracic Echocardiogram Image Quality.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Speckle Tracking Echocardiography in Patients with Non-Ischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy Who Undergo Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the presented review is to summarize the literature data on the accuracy and clinical applicability of artificial intelligence (AI) models as a valuable alternative to the current guidelines in predicting cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response and phenotyping of patients eligible for CRT implantation. This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. After a search of Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases, 675 records were identified. Twenty supervised (prediction of CRT response) and 9 unsupervised (clustering and phenotyping) AI models were analyzed qualitatively (22 studies, 14,258 patients). Fifty-five percent of AI models were based on retrospective studies. Unsupervised AI models were able to identify clusters of patients with significantly different rates of primary outcome events (death, heart failure event). In comparison to the guideline-based CRT response prediction accuracy of 70%, supervised AI models trained on cohorts with > 100 patients achieved up to 85% accuracy and an AUC of 0.86 in their prediction of response to CRT for echocardiographic and clinical outcomes, respectively. AI models seem to be an accurate and clinically applicable tool in phenotyping of patients eligible for CRT implantation and predicting potential responders. In the future, AI may help to increase CRT response rates to over 80% and improve clinical decision-making and prognosis of the patients, including reduction of mortality rates. However, these findings must be validated in randomized controlled trials.
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.