ArticleBMJ open2025
Deep learning prediction of peak oxygen uptake in patients with coronary heart disease: a retrospective study.
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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop and validate prediction models for peak oxygen uptake (VO₂peak) in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) using submaximal cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) indicators and deep learning methods.
designRetrospective model development and validation study.
settingCardiac Rehabilitation Centre, Peking University Third Hospital, China.
participantsA total of 10 538 patients with CHD who underwent CPET between January 2014 and December 2019.
methodsClinical data and CPET indicators were collected. Multiple machine learning and deep learning models were developed and compared. Model performance was assessed using R², mean absolute error (MAE), bias, Bland-Altman analysis and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) feature importance ranking.
resultsThe neural network model achieved the best performance (R² = 0.82, MAE=1.55 mL/kg/min, bias=0.08). XGBoost was the best-performing traditional machine learning model (R² = 0.74). SHAP analysis identified eight top-ranked features, including VO₂@AT, OUES, weight, VE/VCO₂ slope, VE/VCO₂@AT, age, gender and HR@AT.
conclusionThe CPET deep learning model shows potential for predicting VO₂peak in CHD patients, but further external validation and prospective studies are required before clinical application.
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.