ArticleBMJ open2024
Machine learning methods, applications and economic analysis to predict heart failure hospitalisation risk: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMachine learning (ML) has emerged as a powerful tool for uncovering patterns and generating new information. In cardiology, it has shown promising results in predictive outcomes risk assessment of heart failure (HF) patients, a chronic condition affecting over 64 million individuals globally.This scoping review aims to synthesise the evidence on ML methods, applications and economic analysis to predict the HF hospitalisation risk. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will use the approach described by Arksey and O'Malley. This protocol will use the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Protocol, and the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews will be used to present the results. PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science are the databases that will be searched. Two reviewers will independently screen the full-text studies for inclusion and extract the data. All the studies focusing on ML models to predict the risk of hospitalisation from HF adult patients will be included. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this review. The dissemination strategy includes peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and dissemination to relevant stakeholders.
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.