Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39024245›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Using machine learning to predict acute myocardial infarction and ischemic heart disease in primary care cardiovascular patients.

N Salet, A Gökdemir, J Preijde, C H van Heck, F Eijkenaar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

N SaletErasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9254-8580
A GökdemirErasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J PreijdeEsculine b.v., Capelle aan den IJssel, South Holland, The Netherlands.
C H van HeckDrechtDokters, Hendrik-Ido-Ambacht, South Holland, The Netherlands.
F EijkenaarErasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4471-7623

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly recognition, which preferably happens in primary care, is the most important tool to combat cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study aims to predict acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and ischemic heart disease (IHD) using Machine Learning (ML) in primary care cardiovascular patients. We compare the ML-models' performance with that of the common SMART algorithm and discuss clinical implications. METHODS AND

resultsPatient-level medical record data (n = 13,218) collected between 2011-2021 from 90 GP-practices were used to construct two random forest models (one for AMI and one for IHD) as well as a linear model based on the SMART risk prediction algorithm as a suitable comparator. The data contained patient-level predictors, including demographics, procedures, medications, biometrics, and diagnosis. Temporal cross-validation was used to assess performance. Furthermore, predictors that contributed most to the ML-models' accuracy were identified. The ML-model predicting AMI had an accuracy of 0.97, a sensitivity of 0.67, a specificity of 1.00 and a precision of 0.99. The AUC was 0.96 and the Brier score was 0.03. The IHD-model had similar performance. In both ML-models anticoagulants/antiplatelet use, systolic blood pressure, mean blood glucose, and eGFR contributed most to model accuracy. For both outcomes, the SMART algorithm was substantially outperformed by ML on all metrics.

conclusionOur findings underline the potential of using ML for CVD prediction purposes in primary care, although the interpretation of predictors can be difficult. Clinicians, patients, and researchers might benefit from transitioning to using ML-models in support of individualized predictions by primary care physicians and subsequent (secondary) prevention.

Indexed as

Machine LearningMyocardial InfarctionMyocardial IschemiaPrimary Health CareAdultAgedAlgorithmsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID39024245
PMCPMC11257251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.