ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Predicting ICU mortality in heart failure patients based on blood tests and vital signs.
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 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamic trajectories of serum sodium and urine output and their association with prognosis in sepsis: a group-based multi-trajectory modelling analysis using MIMIC-IV.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- First-Day Glycemic Exposure and 28-Day Mortality in the ICU: A Multicohort Study.Research square · 2026Article
- First-Day Glycemic Exposure and 28-Day Mortality in the ICU: A Multicenter Cohort Study.Research square · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Logistic Regression and Machine Learning Algorithms for Predicting De Novo Stress Urinary Incontinence or Symptomatic Worsening Following Pelvic Floor Reconstruction: A Multicenter Study.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Development and external validation of an explainable machine learning model for in-hospital mortality risk stratification in intensive care unit patients with heart failure.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Currently, heart failure has become one of the major complications in the advanced stages of various cardiovascular diseases. Numerous predictive models have been developed to estimate the mortality rate of heart failure patients; however, these models often require the measurement of multiple indicators and the inclusion of various scoring systems. Critically ill patients are often unsuitable for extensive diagnostic tests, and many primary care hospitals lack comprehensive diagnostic equipment. In contrast, blood tests are not only simpler but also reflect the overall health status of the body. Therefore, using simpler methods to predict mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients has become the focus of this study. Method: A total of 5,383 cases from the eICU database were utilized for model development, while 530 cases from the MIMIC-IV database were employed for external testing. The patients were primarily diagnosed with heart failure, and the data included demographic information, blood oxygen saturation, white blood cells, red blood cells, platelets, hemoglobin, electrolytes, lactate, glucose, and other biochemical and physiological indicators collected during the ICU stay. Enhance the accuracy of data analysis and improve the universality of the model, all data underwent rigorous preprocessing prior to training, combined with data standardization. We utilized a variety of machine learning algorithms for modeling purposes, including Logistic Regression (LR), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Decision Trees, Random Forests, Gradient Boosting Machines (GBM), XGBoost, and Neural Networks. The performance of the model was assessed through cross-validation and evaluated using the F1-score. Conclusion: Through feature selection, 15 key variables were ultimately identified. Among the nine machine learning models evaluated, the Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) demonstrated the best overall performance. In predicting mortality (i.e., the deceased population), the MLP achieved an F1 score of 0.54, a recall of 0.71, and a precision of 0.44. The relatively high F1 score of the MLP highlights its potential clinical application value.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.