ArticleScientific reports2024
FIT calculator: a multi-risk prediction framework for medical outcomes using cardiorespiratory fitness 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 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparative evaluation of explainability techniques for image data.Scientific reports · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurately predicting patients' risk for specific medical outcomes is paramount for effective healthcare management and personalized medicine. While a substantial body of literature addresses the prediction of diverse medical conditions, existing models predominantly focus on singular outcomes, limiting their scope to one disease at a time. However, clinical reality often entails patients concurrently facing multiple health risks across various medical domains. In response to this gap, our study proposes a novel multi-risk framework adept at simultaneous risk prediction for multiple clinical outcomes, including diabetes, mortality, and hypertension. Leveraging a concise set of features extracted from patients' cardiorespiratory fitness data, our framework minimizes computational complexity while maximizing predictive accuracy. Moreover, we integrate a state-of-the-art instance-based interpretability technique into our framework, providing users with comprehensive explanations for each prediction. These explanations afford medical practitioners invaluable insights into the primary health factors influencing individual predictions, fostering greater trust and utility in the underlying prediction models. Our approach thus stands to significantly enhance healthcare decision-making processes, facilitating more targeted interventions and improving patient outcomes in clinical practice. Our prediction framework utilizes an automated machine learning framework, Auto-Weka, to optimize machine learning models and hyper-parameter configurations for the simultaneous prediction of three medical outcomes: diabetes, mortality, and hypertension. Additionally, we employ a local interpretability technique to elucidate predictions generated by our framework. These explanations manifest visually, highlighting key attributes contributing to each instance's prediction for enhanced interpretability. Using automated machine learning techniques, the models simultaneously predict hypertension, mortality, and diabetes risks, utilizing only nine patient features. They achieved an average AUC of 0.90 ± 0.001 on the hypertension dataset, 0.90 ± 0.002 on the mortality dataset, and 0.89 ± 0.001 on the diabetes dataset through tenfold cross-validation. Additionally, the models demonstrated strong performance with an average AUC of 0.89 ± 0.001 on the hypertension dataset, 0.90 ± 0.001 on the mortality dataset, and 0.89 ± 0.001 on the diabetes dataset using bootstrap evaluation with 1000 resamples.
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.