Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39656330›Full record

ReviewHeart failure reviews2025

Machine learning in predicting heart failure survival: a review of current models and future prospects.

Emmanuel Kokori, Ravi Patel, Gbolahan Olatunji, Bonaventure Michael Ukoaka, Israel Charles Abraham, Victor Oluwatomiwa Ajekiigbe, Julia Mimi Kwape, Adetola Emmanuel Babalola, Ntishor Gabriel Udam, Nicholas Aderinto

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Heart failure reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

10 authors.

Emmanuel KokoriDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria.
Ravi PatelDepartment of Internal Medicine, Methodist Health System Dallas, Dallas, TX, USA.
Gbolahan OlatunjiDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria.
Bonaventure Michael UkoakaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Asokoro District Hospital, Abuja, Nigeria.
Israel Charles AbrahamDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria.
Victor Oluwatomiwa AjekiigbeDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria.
Julia Mimi KwapeSchool of Medicine, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.
Adetola Emmanuel BabalolaFaculty of Dentistry, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Ntishor Gabriel UdamUniversity of Calabar, Calabar, Nigeria.
Nicholas AderintoDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria. nicholasoluwaseyi6@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Heart failure is a complex and prevalent condition with significant implications for patient management and survival prediction. Traditional predictive models often fall short in accuracy due to their reliance on pre-specified predictors and assumptions of variable independence. This review aims to assess the role of machine learning (ML) algorithms in predicting heart failure survival, comparing their performance with traditional statistical methods and identifying key predictive features. We conducted a review of studies utilizing ML algorithms for heart failure survival prediction. Data were sourced from PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, Embase, DOAJ, and the Cochrane Library, covering studies published until July 2024. A total of 10 studies were reviewed, encompassing 468,171 patients with heart failure. ML algorithms, particularly random forests and gradient boosting methods, demonstrated superior performance compared to traditional statistical models. These algorithms effectively identified key risk factors and stratified patients into risk categories with high accuracy. Notably, extreme learning machine (ELM) and CatBoost models showed exceptional predictive capabilities, as indicated by metrics such as Harrell's concordance index (C-index) and area under the curve (AUC). Key predictive features included ejection fraction (EF), serum creatinine (S Cr), and blood urea nitrogen (BUN). ML algorithms offer significant advantages in predicting heart failure survival by uncovering complex patterns and improving risk stratification. Their integration into clinical practice could lead to more personalized treatment strategies and enhanced patient outcomes. However, challenges such as data quality, model interpretability, and integration into clinical workflows need to be addressed.

Indexed as

Heart FailureMachine LearningAlgorithmsHumansPrognosisRisk AssessmentSurvival RateClinical decision supportHeart failureMachine learningPredictive modelsSurvival prediction

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.