ArticleESC heart failure2024
Development of interpretable machine learning models to predict in-hospital prognosis of acute heart failure patients.
Article 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 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of machine learning algorithms for mortality risk, readmission and phenotype prediction in patients with heart failure: exploring key data sources, input variables and outcomes.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Pooled it
- Dynamic multimodal brain function monitoring enables quantitative severity grading and prognostic prediction in pediatric neurocritical care.Jornal de pediatria · 2026Article
- Machine learning model for intravenous immunoglobulin resistance in Kawasaki disease: model development and validation study.World journal of pediatrics : WJP · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of an XGBoost-SHAP Model for Predicting Adverse Outcomes in Elderly Cardiovascular Patients With Polypharmacy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2026Article
- Contribution of resting pulse rate to fall risk prediction in patients with glaucoma: a nationwide retrospective study based on an XGBoost model.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Optimized explainable AI and digital twin for patient flow improvement in ICU during respiratory epidemics.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Interpretable Machine Learning with SHAP Identifies Key Biomarkers in a Multi-Factorial Spectrum of Age-Related Neurological and Metabolic Conditions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Establishment and validation of a machine learning model to stratify malnutrition risk in hospitalized older patients with chronic heart failure.Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition · 2026Article
- Triglyceride-glucose index and hyperhomocysteinemia within a cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic biomarker network: insights from interpretable machine learning and epidemiological modeling.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Development and External Validation of a Machine Learning Model for Predicting Wound Infection in Diabetic Foot Ulcers.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2026Article
- Predicting mortality in non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage with glucose and lipid data.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- HearteXplain: explainable prediction of acute heart failure and identification of hematologic biomarkers using EBMs and Morris sensitivity analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Logistic Regression and Machine Learning Algorithms for the Risk Prediction of Perioperative Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Elderly Patients.Aging medicine (Milton (N.S.W)) · 2025Article
- Cluster analysis identifies quantitative CT imaging-based subgroups in COPD subjects with pulmonary artery enlargement.The European respiratory journal · 2025Article
- PiCCO hemodynamic parameters in cardiogenic shock: prediction of LVEF, NT-proBNP and MACE based on XGBoost machine learning model.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical phenotypes of heart failure patients with supranormal ejection fraction.ESC heart failure · 2024Article
- Development of interpretable machine learning models to predict in-hospital prognosis of acute heart failure patients.ESC heart failure · 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
31 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsIn recent years, there has been remarkable development in machine learning (ML) models, showing a trend towards high prediction performance. ML models with high prediction performance often become structurally complex and are frequently perceived as black boxes, hindering intuitive interpretation of the prediction results. We aimed to develop ML models with high prediction performance, interpretability, and superior risk stratification to predict in-hospital mortality and worsening heart failure (WHF) in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). METHODS AND
resultsBased on the Kyoto Congestive Heart Failure registry, which enrolled 4056 patients with AHF, we developed prediction models for in-hospital mortality and WHF using information obtained on the first day of admission (demographics, physical examination, blood test results, etc.). After excluding 16 patients who died on the first or second day of admission, the original dataset (n = 4040) was split 4:1 into training (n = 3232) and test datasets (n = 808). Based on the training dataset, we developed three types of prediction models: (i) the classification and regression trees (CART) model; (ii) the random forest (RF) model; and (iii) the extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) model. The performance of each model was evaluated using the test dataset, based on metrics including sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), Brier score, and calibration slope. For the complex structure of the XGBoost model, we performed SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis, classifying patients into interpretable clusters. In the original dataset, the proportion of females was 44.8% (1809/4040), and the average age was 77.9 ± 12.0. The in-hospital mortality rate was 6.3% (255/4040) and the WHF rate was 22.3% (900/4040) in the total study population. In the in-hospital mortality prediction, the AUC for the XGBoost model was 0.816 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.815-0.818], surpassing the AUC values for the CART model (0.683, 95% CI: 0.680-0.685) and the RF model (0.755, 95% CI: 0.753-0.757). Similarly, in the WHF prediction, the AUC for the XGBoost model was 0.766 (95% CI: 0.765-0.768), outperforming the AUC values for the CART model (0.688, 95% CI: 0.686-0.689) and the RF model (0.713, 95% CI: 0.711-0.714). In the XGBoost model, interpretable clusters were formed, and the rates of in-hospital mortality and WHF were similar among each cluster in both the training and test datasets.
conclusionsThe XGBoost models with SHAP analysis provide high prediction performance, interpretability, and reproducible risk stratification for in-hospital mortality and WHF for patients with AHF.
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.