Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39650370›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2024

Accurately assessing congenital heart disease using artificial intelligence.

Khalil Khan, Farhan Ullah, Ikram Syed, Hashim Ali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 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

4 authors.

Khalil KhanDepartment of Computer Science, School of Engineering and Digital Sciences, Nazarbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan.
Farhan UllahCollege of Computer Science and Software Engineering, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Ikram SyedDept of Information and Communication Engineering, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Yongin, Gyeonggy-do, Republic of South Korea.
Hashim AliDepartment of Computer Science, School of Engineering and Digital Sciences, Nazarbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Congenital heart disease (CHD) remains a significant global health challenge, particularly contributing to newborn mortality, with the highest rates observed in middle- and low-income countries due to limited healthcare resources. Machine learning (ML) presents a promising solution by developing predictive models that more accurately assess the risk of mortality associated with CHD. These ML-based models can help healthcare professionals identify high-risk infants and ensure timely and appropriate care. In addition, ML algorithms excel at detecting and analyzing complex patterns that can be overlooked by human clinicians, thereby enhancing diagnostic accuracy. Despite notable advancements, ongoing research continues to explore the full potential of ML in the identification of CHD. The proposed article provides a comprehensive analysis of the ML methods for the diagnosis of CHD in the last eight years. The study also describes different data sets available for CHD research, discussing their characteristics, collection methods, and relevance to ML applications. In addition, the article also evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of existing algorithms, offering a critical review of their performance and limitations. Finally, the article proposes several promising directions for future research, with the aim of further improving the efficacy of ML in the diagnosis and treatment of CHD.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceCongenital heart diseaseCritical aortic stenosisEchocardiographyHypoplastic left heart syndromeML algorithmsParental ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID39650370
PMCPMC11623015

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.