ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Development and validation of predictive models for prognostic assessment in patients with acute non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a multicentre real-world study from China.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew models specifically predict the prognoses of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients. Additionally, these models have inadequate predictive performance for combined ischemic events other than all-cause death.
methodsThis analysis included 4845 NSTEMI patients who completed a follow-up within 180 days after discharge. Data from three hospitals were randomly selected for the model's training and tuning, and data from two hospitals were used for external validation. Five machine learning algorithms were used to develop the predictive models. The receiver operating characteristic curve was plotted to reflect the model's sensitivity and accuracy. The area under the curve (AUC) was calculated to evaluate the model's classification performance. The model's prediction performance was compared with the global registry of acute coronary events (GRACE) risk score.
resultsIncorporating clinical variables such as coronary artery lesions, reperfusion strategies, laboratory tests, and echocardiography parameters, predictive models were developed and validated to assess the incidence risk of adverse clinical outcomes in NSTEMI patients. The logistic regression model performed well in predicting the incidence risk of all-cause death (sensitivity 82.7%,specificity 75.7%, AUC 0.869) and moderately in predicting the incidence risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (sensitivity 60.5%, specificity 67.7%, AUC 0.700).Compared with the GRACE risk score, this model demonstrated significant improvements in both discrimination and incremental prognostic value (all p < 0.05).
conclusionThe machine learning-based prognosis model significantly improves the performance of the current risk assessment model for predicting adverse clinical outcomes in NSTEMI patients.
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.