Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40562550›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Machine learning methods, applications and economic analysis to predict heart failure hospitalisation risk: a scoping review.

João Abreu, Joana Seringa, Teresa Magalhaes

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Biomarkers in Heart Failure: A Review and a Wish.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
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

3 authors.

João AbreuNOVA National School of Public Health, NOVA University Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal jmr.abreu@ensp.unl.pt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-1792-1711
Joana SeringaNOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre, Comprehensive Health Research Center (CHRC), REAL, CCAL, NOVA University Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1346-570X
Teresa MagalhaesNOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre, Comprehensive Health Research Center (CHRC), REAL, CCAL, NOVA University Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3794-1659

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMachine Learning (ML) has been transformative in healthcare, enabling more precise diagnostics, personalised treatment regimens and enhanced patient care. In cardiology, ML plays a crucial role in risk prediction and patient stratification, particularly for heart failure (HF), a condition affecting over 64 million people globally and imposing an economic burden of approximately $108 billion annually. ML applications in HF include predictive analytics for risk assessment, identifying patient subgroups with varying prognoses and optimising treatment pathways. By accurately predicting the likelihood of hospitalisation and rehospitalisation, ML tools help tailor interventions, reduce hospital visits, improve patient outcomes and lower healthcare costs.

objectiveTo conduct a comprehensive review of existing ML models designed to predict hospitalisation risk in individuals with HF.

methodsA database search including PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science was conducted on 31 March 2024. Studies were selected based on inclusion criteria focusing on ML models predicting hospitalisation risks in adults with HF. The data from 27 studies meeting the criteria were extracted and analysed, with a focus on the predictive performance of the ML models and the presence of economic analysis.

resultsMost studies focused on predicting readmission rather than first-time hospitalisation. All included studies employed supervised ML algorithms, with ensemble-based methods generally yielding the highest predictive performance. For 30-day hospitalisation or readmission risk, Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) achieved the highest mean area under the curve (AUC) (0.69), followed by Naïve Bayes (0.68) and Deep Unified Networks (0.66). For 90-day risk, the best-performing models were Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator and Gradient Boosting, both with a mean AUC of 0.75, followed by Random Forest (0.67). When the prediction timeframe was unspecified, Categorical Boosting achieved the highest performance with a mean AUC of 0.88, followed by Generalised Linear Model Net and XGBoost (both 0.79).Electronic health records were the primary data source across studies; however, few models included patient-reported outcomes or socioeconomic variables.None of the studies conducted an economic evaluation to assess the cost-effectiveness of these models.

conclusionsML holds substantial potential for improving HF care. However, further efforts are needed to enhance the generalisation of models, integrate diverse data sources and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these technologies.

Indexed as

Heart FailureHospitalizationMachine LearningHumansPatient ReadmissionRisk AssessmentCARDIOLOGYHealth economicsHeart failureHospitalizationMachine Learning

Identifiers

PMID40562550
PMCPMC12198813

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.