ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
Heart disease prediction using hybrid TabNet architecture with stacked ensemble learning.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) remain the leading cause of death worldwide, and early detection is critical for timely intervention and improved patient outcomes. However, current prediction tools are often limited by noisy, heterogeneous patient data and modest accuracy. To address this challenge, we propose a stacked ensemble framework that integrates: TabNet, a deep learning model that can identify the most relevant clinical features, and XGBoost, a powerful tree-based method known for its robustness. Their outputs are integrated using a Logistic Regression (LR) or Support Vector Machine (SVM) as meta learner, creating a system that balances accuracy and interpretability. Testing on Kaggle and UCI CVD datasets demonstrate that our ensemble consistently outperforms baseline models across accuracy, F1-score, precision, recall, ROC-AUC, PR-AUC, and matthews correlation coefficient (MCC). These results suggest that combining deep learning with tree-based models offers a practical way to improve risk prediction, supporting clinicians in making more reliable decisions for early CVD detection.
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.