ArticleThe Canadian journal of cardiology2026
Integrating Imaging Markers for Clinical Risk Stratification of Takotsubo Syndrome.
Article in The Canadian journal of cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to develop machine learning (ML) models that integrate clinical and echocardiographic markers to predict adverse cardiovascular events in patients with Takotsubo syndrome (TTS).
methodsML-based prediction models were developed on the basis of 2 retrospective data sets comprising 450 TTS patients (252 in an internal cohort and 198 in an external cohort). Baseline clinical characteristics included demographic characteristics, medical history, triggering factors, symptoms, and vital signs. All echocardiograms were performed within 24 hours of hospital admission. Feature selection and model development were performed using the random forest algorithm for prediction of 3-month major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Model performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC), calibration, sensitivity, and specificity. Model interpretability was evaluated using SHapley Additive exPlanations.
resultsThe established ML models, which integrated key clinical and echocardiographic variables, demonstrated good discrimination for 3-month MACE prediction. The machine learning-based clinical-echocardiographic-4 model, which incorporated mitral valve inflow (E wave) deceleration time, systolic blood pressure, right ventricular fractional area change, and heart rate showed an AUC of 0.80 (95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.86) in the internal cohort and an AUC of 0.76 (95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.84) in the external cohort. Calibration analyses showed good agreement between predicted and observed risks internally and acceptable calibration externally. SHapley Additive exPlanations analysis highlighted the dominant contributions of key features to MACE prediction. Restricted cubic spline analyses identified clinically relevant thresholds for elevated MACE risk: deceleration time < 129.9 ms, systolic blood pressure < 125 mm Hg, right ventricular fractional area change < 34.7%, and heart rate > 93 beats per minute.
conclusionsML-based clinical-echocardiographic prediction models showed prognostic value in early risk stratification in hospitalized TTS 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.