ArticleScientific reports2024
Development of risk models of incident hypertension using machine learning on the HUNT study data.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-horizon machine learning for population-level hypertension risk stratification in the UK Biobank.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- An interpretable combinatorial data-mining framework for predicting new-onset hypertension in the general population.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Article
- The role of artificial intelligence in hypertension management.Current opinion in nephrology and hypertension · 2026Review
- Developing a prediction model of neonatal pneumonia in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus in primary medical institutions.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Machine Learning and Traditional Statistical Models to Assess the Value of Stroke Genetic Liability for Prediction of Risk of Stroke Within the UK Biobank.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Predicting hypertension and identifying most important factors among married women in Bangladesh using machine learning approach.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we aimed to create an 11-year hypertension risk prediction model using data from the Trøndelag Health (HUNT) Study in Norway, involving 17 852 individuals (20-85 years; 38% male; 24% incidence rate) with blood pressure (BP) below the hypertension threshold at baseline (1995-1997). We assessed 18 clinical, behavioral, and socioeconomic features, employing machine learning models such as eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Elastic regression, K-Nearest Neighbor, Support Vector Machines (SVM) and Random Forest. For comparison, we used logistic regression and a decision rule as reference models and validated six external models, with focus on the Framingham risk model. The top-performing models consistently included XGBoost, Elastic regression and SVM. These models efficiently identified hypertension risk, even among individuals with optimal baseline BP (< 120/80 mmHg), although improvement over reference models was modest. The recalibrated Framingham risk model outperformed the reference models, approaching the best-performing ML models. Important features included age, systolic and diastolic BP, body mass index, height, and family history of hypertension. In conclusion, our study demonstrated that linear effects sufficed for a well-performing model. The best models efficiently predicted hypertension risk, even among those with optimal or normal baseline BP, using few features. The recalibrated Framingham risk model proved effective in our cohort.
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.