Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41280662›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention2025

Machine learning and Mendelian randomization identify key lifestyle factors in coronary heart disease: A NHANES-Based study.

Yang Yang Cui, Yonghong Zhang, Lang Zeng, Shikang Li, Xue Mei, Xiangmei Yang, Peng Zhou, Lijuan Xiong, Yijuan Huang, Jing Luo and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Yang Yang CuiDepartment of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China.
Yonghong ZhangDepartment of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China.
Lang ZengDepartment of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China.
Shikang LiDepartment of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China.
Xue MeiSchool of Pharmacy, Institute of Material Medica, North Sichuan Medical College, Sichuan, Nanchong, 637000, China.
Xiangmei YangDepartment of Emergency, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China.
Peng ZhouDepartment of Cardiology, People's Hospital of Guang 'an District, Guang 'an, 638550, China.
Lijuan XiongDepartment of Cardiology, People's Hospital of Guang 'an District, Guang 'an, 638550, China.
Yijuan HuangDepartment of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China.
Jing LuoDepartment of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China.
Fenglin WuDepartment of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China.
Rongchuan YueDepartment of Cardiology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to bridge the gap between predictive modeling and causal inference by utilizing lifestyle data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) database to compare the predictive performance of multiple machine learning models for coronary heart disease (CHD). By incorporating Mendelian randomization, the study seeks to validate and identify the lifestyle variables with both predictive power and causal impact on CHD. Methods: We extracted variables related to demographic characteristics and lifestyle from the NHANES database (2013-2018; n = 29,400). Recursive feature elimination (RFE) was employed to rank variable importance and determine the optimal feature subset. Subsequently, eight machine learning models-including Support Vector Machine (SVM), Neural Network (NN), Naive Bayes (NB), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), Generalized Linear Model (GLM), Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost), and Decision Tree (DT)-were developed for CHD prediction. Model performance was evaluated using metrics such as accuracy, precision, sensitivity, specificity, recall, F1-score, and the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve, with variable contributions visualized using Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP). Additionally, Mendelian randomization (MR) was applied to distinguish associative from causal relationships, validating top predictors via Genome-Wide Association Study (GWAS)-derived genetic instruments. Results: RFE identified age, sex, fasting blood glucose, body mass index (BMI), total cholesterol (TC) intake, sleep duration, diastolic blood pressure, and smoking as the most significant predictors of CHD. Among the models, SVM outperformed DT, AdaBoost, XGBoost, NN, MLP, NB, and GLM. The SVM model achieved the highest performance with an accuracy of 83.4 % and an AUC value of 0.909, demonstrating clinically actionable predictive power. MR confirmed causal associations for five variables: BMI (OR: 1.01, Conclusion: The SVM machine learning model, based on NHANES data, enables faster and more efficient prediction of CHD. The study identified age, sex, BMI, TC intake, sleep duration, diastolic blood pressure, and smoking as the lifestyle variables with the greatest impact on CHD. This dual approach advances precision prevention by combining predictive accuracy with genetic evidence.

Indexed as

Causal inferenceCoronary heart diseaseMachine learningMendelian randomizationNHANES

Identifiers

PMID41280662
PMCPMC12637256

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.