Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40612375›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025

Prediction of cardiovascular risk using machine-learning methods. Sex-specific differences.

Sara Castel-Feced, Isabel Aguilar-Palacio, Sara Malo, Juan González-García, Lina Maldonado, María José Rabanaque-Hernández

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Sara Castel-FecedFundación Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Aragón (IIS Aragón), Zaragoza, Spain.
Isabel Aguilar-PalacioDepartment of Employment, Science and Universities of the Government of Aragón (Spain), GRISSA Research Group, Zaragoza, Spain.
Sara MaloDepartment of Employment, Science and Universities of the Government of Aragón (Spain), GRISSA Research Group, Zaragoza, Spain.
Juan González-GarcíaBiocomputing Unit, Data Science for Health Services and Policy Research Aragon Health Sciences Institute (IACS), Zaragoza, Spain.
Lina MaldonadoDepartment of Employment, Science and Universities of the Government of Aragón (Spain), GRISSA Research Group, Zaragoza, Spain.
María José Rabanaque-HernándezDepartment of Employment, Science and Universities of the Government of Aragón (Spain), GRISSA Research Group, Zaragoza, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Machine learning (ML) algorithms offer some advantages over traditional scoring systems to assess the influence of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) on the risk of major cardiovascular event (MACE), and could be useful in clinical practice. These algorithms can also be trained using a growing body of real world data (RWD). The aim of the study was to evaluate the MACE risk applying the XGBoost and Random Forest ML algorithms to RWD, stratifying the study population by sex, comparing the outcomes of these two algorithms. Methods: The follow-up period of the study was from 2018 to 2020. For each algorithm, 3 models were generated, including age and different combinations of three groups of variables: blood test and blood pressure measurements; CVRFs; and medication adherence. Results: In this study, 52,393 subjects were included, of whom 581 suffered a MACE. The incidence of MACE was 1% in women and 1.3% in men. The most prevalent CVRF was hypertension, followed by hypercholesterolaemia in both sexes. Adherence to treatment was highest for antihypertensives and lowest for antidiabetics. In all models age was the greatest relative contributor to the risk of MACE, followed by adherence to antidiabetics. Adherence to treatment proved to be an important variable in the risk of having a MACE. Moreover, similar performance was found for RF and XGBoost algorithms. Conclusion: These findings support the use of ML to assess cardiovascular risk and guide personalized prevention strategies in primary care settings.

Indexed as

adherence to treatmentcardiovascular diseasemachine learningrandom forestXGBoost

Identifiers

PMID40612375
PMCPMC12222323

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.