ArticleBioData mining2024
Machine-learning-based models to predict cardiovascular risk using oculomics and clinic variables in KNHANES.
Article in BioData mining, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early differentiation between paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation based on interpretable machine learning: a multicenter retrospective study.BioData mining · 2026Article
- An online non-radiographic osteoporosis prediction calculator constructed using interpretable machine learning.BioData mining · 2026Article
- Dyslipidemia and aging: the non-linear association between atherogenic index of plasma (AIP) and aging acceleration.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2025Article
- Preclinical Retinal Disease Models: Applications in Drug Development and Translational Research.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A machine learning-based model for predicting paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation based on EHR.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecent researches have found a strong correlation between the triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index or the atherogenic index of plasma (AIP) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. However, there is a lack of research on non-invasive and rapid prediction of cardiovascular risk. We aimed to develop and validate a machine-learning model for predicting cardiovascular risk based on variables encompassing clinical questionnaires and oculomics.
methodsWe collected data from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES). The training dataset (80% from the year 2008 to 2011 KNHANES) was used for machine learning model development, with internal validation using the remaining 20%. An external validation dataset from the year 2012 assessed the model's predictive capacity for TyG-index or AIP in new cases. We included 32122 participants in the final dataset. Machine learning models used 25 algorithms were trained on oculomics measurements and clinical questionnaires to predict the range of TyG-index and AIP. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score were used to evaluate the performance of our machine learning models.
resultsBased on large-scale cohort studies, we determined TyG-index cut-off points at 8.0, 8.75 (upper one-third values), 8.93 (upper one-fourth values), and AIP cut-offs at 0.318, 0.34. Values surpassing these thresholds indicated elevated cardiovascular risk. The best-performing algorithm revealed TyG-index cut-offs at 8.0, 8.75, and 8.93 with internal validation AUCs of 0.812, 0.873, and 0.911, respectively. External validation AUCs were 0.809, 0.863, and 0.901. For AIP at 0.34, internal and external validation achieved similar AUCs of 0.849 and 0.842. Slightly lower performance was seen for the 0.318 cut-off, with AUCs of 0.844 and 0.836. Significant gender-based variations were noted for TyG-index at 8 (male AUC=0.832, female AUC=0.790) and 8.75 (male AUC=0.874, female AUC=0.862) and AIP at 0.318 (male AUC=0.853, female AUC=0.825) and 0.34 (male AUC=0.858, female AUC=0.831). Gender similarity in AUC (male AUC=0.907 versus female AUC=0.906) was observed only when the TyG-index cut-off point equals 8.93.
conclusionWe have established a simple and effective non-invasive machine learning model that has good clinical value for predicting cardiovascular risk in the general population.
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.