ArticleClinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society2026
Utilization of machine learning in diagnosis of postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS).
Article in Clinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePostural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) is a common autonomic disorder characterized by orthostatic intolerance and excessive tachycardia upon standing. Despite its prevalence, POTS is often underdiagnosed or diagnosed late, largely due to limited access to autonomic specialists and testing. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of machine learning (ML) models in diagnosing POTS using validated symptom surveys and physiological measurements.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed data from patients evaluated at the Autonomic Laboratory at Brigham and Women's Faulkner Hospital (2017-2025), with POTS diagnoses confirmed by autonomic testing. ML models based on a multilayer perceptron were trained using patient-reported surveys (Survey of Autonomic Symptoms [SAS], COMPASS-31) and autonomic testing data. Importantly, no orthostatic heart rate criteria for the POTS diagnosis were provided to the models.
resultsA total of 3210 patients were included, of whom 810 had confirmed POTS. All patients completed SAS; 1337 also completed COMPASS-31 (334 with POTS). Models incorporating heart rate data achieved the highest diagnostic accuracy (PyTorch/LightGBM: AUC 0.98/0.99; precision 0.94/0.93; F1 score 0.88/0.93; sensitivity 83%/92%; specificity 98%/98%). In contrast, models trained solely on SAS (AUC 0.68/0.63) or COMPASS-31 (AUC 0.66/0.62) performed poorly.
conclusionML models accurately diagnosed POTS when incorporating heart rate data alongside survey responses, with heart rate data being the strongest predictor. These findings suggest ML could assist in POTS diagnosis. The study also highlights the importance of heart rate measures in POTS diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41772339What 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.