ArticlePloS one2025
Mortality risk prediction in NSTE-ACS following PCI: Insights from a real-world cohort.
Article in PloS one, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) is a major contributor to cardiovascular mortality, yet reliable tools for individualized mortality prediction remain limited. Machine learning offers the potential to enhance prognostic accuracy in this high-risk population.
methodsA total of 1,495 patients with NSTE-ACS who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were retrospectively analyzed. Eight clinical and laboratory variables were selected through univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Five machine learning models-logistic regression, random forest, XGBoost, LightGBM, and naïve Bayes-were constructed. Model performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC) and calibration curves.
resultsAge, diabetes mellitus, and ejection fraction were identified as independent predictors of all-cause mortality. Among all models, LightGBM achieved the highest AUC (0.847), followed by XGBoost (0.822), both of which demonstrated superior discrimination and calibration compared to traditional logistic regression and other algorithms. Calibration analysis showed excellent agreement between predicted and observed mortality in both training and test cohorts.
conclusionGradient boosting models, particularly LightGBM and XGBoost, significantly improve mortality prediction in NSTE-ACS patients after PCI. These models may facilitate more accurate risk stratification and guide personalized post-procedural management strategies in clinical practice.
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.