ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025
An artificial intelligence model integrating culprit lesion diagnosis and risk assessment for acute coronary syndrome.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Electrocardiography to the Catheterization Laboratory: A Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Framework for Acute Coronary Syndrome Detection and Risk Stratification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Explainable ML for ACS culprit plaques: a multidimensional CCTA model highlighting hemodynamic increment.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2026Article
- Systematic evaluation of machine learning models for clinical risk prediction on real-world hospital datasets.iScience · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: An integrated machine learning (ML) approach capable of both diagnosing acute coronary syndrome (ACS, encompassing myocardial infarction and unstable angina) and predicting future ACS risk within defined optimal timeframes remains an unmet need in cardiovascular risk stratification. Methods: We conducted a multicentre cohort study in China between January 2012 and December 2021. The derivation cohort (cohort 1+ cohort 2), consisting of a training, validation, and independent external test set, retrospectively included 1854 patients from four hospitals who underwent coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and received a definitive diagnosis of ACS or chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) within 7 days. The diagnostic performance of five commonly used ML algorithms for identifying ACS culprit lesions was developed and compared within this cohort. After selecting the optimal ML model, its performance was further validated in a single-center prospective cohort (cohort 3) and a nested case-control cohort (cohort 4) from two multicenter prospective cohorts to assess its ability to predict future ACS risk stratification (≥30 days). Findings: The derivation cohort comprised 1854 participants, among whom 281 experienced new-onset ACS within 7 day. The single-centre prospective cohort included 563 participants, of whom 23 developed ACS during follow-up (median 60.0 months). The nested case-control cohort included 202 participants, of whom 43 developed ACS during follow-up (median 28.0 months). In the derivation cohort, the random forest (RF) model demonstrated the best diagnostic performance and robustness among the five ML algorithms for detecting ACS culprit lesions, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.85 across the training (95% confidence interval [Cl]: 0.82-0.89), validation (95% Cl: 0.80-0.90), and test sets (95% Cl: 0.78-0.92). In two prospective cohorts, Kaplan-Meier curves showed that the RF model successfully stratified the risk of future ACS events (both log-rank Interpretation: The ACS culprit lesion model developed using RF algorithms demonstrated superior diagnostic performance and was effective for short-term (2-year) ACS risk stratification. Funding: This work was supported by the Noncommunicable Chronic Diseases-National Science and Technology Major Project (2024ZD0521700), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 82441019 for L.J. Z.).
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.