ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
An Integrated Machine Learning Approach for Congestive Heart Failure Prediction.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 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, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced Prediction of Cardiovascular Disease Through Integrated Machine Learning Models Combining Clinical and Demographic Characteristics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Addressing Class Imbalance in Fetal Health Classification: Rigorous Benchmarking of Multi-Class Resampling Methods on Cardiotocography Data.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Early metoprolol use in ICU patients with congestive heart failure is associated with increased 30-day mortality: a causal machine learning study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Deep neural network base competing risk in predicting heart failure patient's survival.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2025Article
- Early Detection of Fetal Health Conditions Using Machine Learning for Classifying Imbalanced Cardiotocographic Data.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Congestive heart failure (CHF) is one of the primary sources of mortality and morbidity among the global population. Over 26 million individuals globally are affected by heart disease, and its prevalence is rising by 2% yearly. With advances in healthcare technologies, if we predict CHF in the early stages, one of the leading global mortality factors can be reduced. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to use machine learning applications to enhance the diagnosis of CHF and to reduce the cost of diagnosis by employing minimum features to forecast the possibility of a CHF occurring. We employ a deep neural network (DNN) classifier for CHF classification and compare the performance of DNN with various machine learning classifiers. In this research, we use a very challenging dataset, called the Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS) dataset, and a unique pre-processing technique by integrating C4.5 and K-nearest neighbor (KNN). While the C4.5 technique is used to find significant features and remove the outlier data from the dataset, the KNN algorithm is employed for missing data imputation. For classification, we compare six state-of-the-art machine learning (ML) algorithms (KNN, logistic regression (LR), naive Bayes (NB), random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), and decision tree (DT)) with DNN. To evaluate the performance, we use seven statistical measurements (i.e., accuracy, specificity, sensitivity, F1-score, precision, Matthew's correlation coefficient, and false positive rate). Overall, our results reflect our proposed integrated approach, which outperformed other machine learning algorithms in terms of CHF prediction, reducing patient expenses by reducing the number of medical tests. The proposed model obtained 97.03% F1-score, 95.30% accuracy, 96.49% sensitivity, and 97.58% precision.
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.