ReviewESC heart failure2024
Predicting in-hospital mortality among patients admitted with a diagnosis of heart failure: a machine learning approach.
Review in ESC heart failure, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-time monitoring of in-hospital mortality risk in intensive care units heart failure patients using an extreme gradient boosting model.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2026Article
- Integrative transcriptomic and single-cell analysis reveals mitochondrial-related gene biomarkers in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Factors affecting prolonged hospital stay in a case of heart failure: a cross-sectional study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Predictors of Long-Term Mortality in Medically Treated Patients With Chronic Heart Failure in Kosovo.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Simultaneous forecasting of vital sign trajectories in the ICU.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Generative AI Models in Time-Varying Biomedical Data: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Prediction models and risk scores in different types of heart failure: a review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Predicting in-hospital mortality among patients admitted with a diagnosis of heart failure: a machine learning approach.ESC heart failure · 2024Review
- Personalized prediction of mortality in patients with acute ischemic stroke using explainable artificial intelligence.European journal of medical research · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Existing risk prediction models for hospitalized heart failure patients are limited. We identified patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of heart failure between 7 May 2013 and 26 April 2022 from a large academic, quaternary care medical centre (training cohort). Demographics, medical comorbidities, vitals, and labs were collected and were used to construct random forest machine learning models to predict in-hospital mortality. Models were compared with logistic regression, and to commonly used heart failure risk scores. The models were subsequently validated in patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of heart failure from a second academic, community medical centre (validation cohort). The entire cohort comprised 21 802 patients, of which 14 539 were in the training cohort and 7263 were in the validation cohort. The median age (25th-75th percentile) was 70 (58-82) for the entire cohort, 43.2% were female, and 6.7% experienced inpatient mortality. In the overall cohort, 7621 (35.0%) patients had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (EF ≤ 40%), 1271 (5.8%) had heart failure with mildly reduced EF (EF 41-49%), and 12 910 (59.2%) had heart failure with preserved EF (EF ≥ 50%). Random forest models in the validation cohort demonstrated a c-statistic (95% confidence interval) of 0.96 (0.95-0.97), sensitivity (SN) of 87.3%, and specificity (SP) of 90.6% for the prediction of in-hospital mortality. Models for those with HFrEF demonstrated a c-statistic of 0.96 (0.94-0.98), SN 88.2%, and SP 91.0%, and those for patients with HFpEF showed a c-statistic of 0.95 (0.93-0.97), SN 87.4%, and SP 89.5% for predicting in-hospital mortality. The random forest model significantly outperformed logistic regression (c-statistic 0.87, SN 75.9%, and SP 86.9%), and current existing risk scores including the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry risk score (c-statistic of 0.70, SN 69%, and SP 62%), and the Get With the Guidelines-Heart Failure risk score (c-statistic 0.69, SN 67%, and SP 63%); P < 0.001 for comparison. Machine learning models built from commonly recorded patient information can accurately predict in-hospital mortality among patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of heart failure.
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.