ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2024
Dynamic Prognosis Prediction for Patients on DAPT After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: Model Development and Validation.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antithrombotic Therapy After PCI in High-Risk Cardiovascular Patients: Navigating Complexity Beyond Guidelines.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Precision cardiovascular medicine with big data and AI.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Review
- Another Score in the Flood, or a Needed Step Toward East Asian Precision?Korean circulation journal · 2026Article
- Article
- Platelets and diseases: signal transduction and advances in targeted therapy.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- Stent thrombosis: a contemporary guide to definitions, risk factors, and management.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Contrastive learning with transformer for adverse endpoint prediction in patients on DAPT post-coronary stent implantation.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) in conjunction with recent updates in dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) management guidelines emphasizes the necessity for innovative models to predict ischemic or bleeding events after drug-eluting stent implantation. Leveraging AI for dynamic prediction has the potential to revolutionize risk stratification and provide personalized decision support for DAPT management. METHODS AND
resultsWe developed and validated a new AI-based pipeline using retrospective data of drug-eluting stent-treated patients, sourced from the Cerner Health Facts data set (n=98 236) and Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (n=9978). The 36 months following drug-eluting stent implantation were designated as our primary forecasting interval, further segmented into 6 sequential prediction windows. We evaluated 5 distinct AI algorithms for their precision in predicting ischemic and bleeding risks. Model discriminative accuracy was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, among other metrics. The weighted light gradient boosting machine stood out as the preeminent model, thus earning its place as our AI-DAPT model. The AI-DAPT demonstrated peak accuracy in the 30 to 36 months window, charting an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 90% [95% CI, 88%-92%] for ischemia and 84% [95% CI, 82%-87%] for bleeding predictions.
conclusionsOur AI-DAPT excels in formulating iterative, refined dynamic predictions by assimilating ongoing updates from patients' clinical profiles, holding value as a novel smart clinical tool to facilitate optimal DAPT duration management with high accuracy and adaptability.
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.