ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2023
Machine learning for predicting intrahospital mortality in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of machine learning models with conventional statistical methods for prediction of percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Prediction of Hospital Mortality in Patients with ST Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Evolution of Risk Measurement Techniques and Assessment of Their Effectiveness (Review).Sovremennye tekhnologii v meditsine · 2024Pooled it
- Development and external validation of an admission-based model for 180-day mortality in diabetic acute myocardial infarction.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Comparing Machine Learning Models for Predicting Mortality after Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence Tools in Myocardial Infarction Prognosis: Evaluating the Performance of Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models.Current cardiology reviews · 2026Review
- Integration of 2D Speckle Tracking Strain and Clinical Indicators for Early Prediction of Post-PCI Heart Failure in Patients with STEMI and Type 2 Diabetes.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Prediction of clinical outcomes of ST-elevated myocardial infarction patients using atmospheric solids analysis probe mass spectrometry and machine learning.The Analyst · 2025Article
- Development and evaluation of a machine learning prediction model for short-term mortality in patients with diabetes or hyperglycemia at emergency department admission.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2025Article
- Machine Learning Approach on Predictive Model Establishment for In-Hospital Mortality in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Solutions for Databases With Dimensionality Reduction and Class Imbalance.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Risk Stratification and Outcome Prediction for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Addressing myocardial infarction in South-Asian populations: risk factors and machine learning approaches.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2025Review
- Machine Learning Applications in Acute Coronary Syndrome: Diagnosis, Outcomes and Management.Advances in therapy · 2025Review
- The development and validation of a prognostic prediction modeling study in acute myocardial infarction patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: hemorrhea and major cardiovascular adverse events.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In an era of increasing need for precision medicine, machine learning has shown promise in making accurate acute myocardial infarction outcome predictions. The accurate assessment of high-risk patients is a crucial component of clinical practice. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) complicates ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and currently, there is no practical method for predicting or monitoring patient prognosis. The objective of the study was to compare the ability of machine learning models to predict in-hospital mortality among STEMI patients with T2DM. We compared six machine learning models, including random forest (RF), CatBoost classifier (CatBoost), naive Bayes (NB), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), gradient boosting classifier (GBC), and logistic regression (LR), with the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score. From January 2016 to January 2020, we enrolled patients aged > 18 years with STEMI and T2DM at the Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University. Overall, 438 patients were enrolled in the study [median age, 62 years; male, 312 (71%); death, 42 (9.5%]). All patients underwent emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and 306 patients with STEMI who underwent PCI were enrolled as the training cohort. Six machine learning algorithms were used to establish the best-fit risk model. An additional 132 patients were recruited as a test cohort to validate the model. The ability of the GRACE score and six algorithm models to predict in-hospital mortality was evaluated. Seven models, including the GRACE risk model, showed an area under the curve (AUC) between 0.73 and 0.91. Among all models, with an accuracy of 0.93, AUC of 0.92, precision of 0.79, and F1 value of 0.57, the CatBoost model demonstrated the best predictive performance. A machine learning algorithm, such as the CatBoost model, may prove clinically beneficial and assist clinicians in tailoring precise management of STEMI patients and predicting in-hospital mortality complicated by T2DM.
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.