ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2026
Risk factor analysis and machine learning-based prediction model for type 4b acute myocardial infarction induced by very late stent thrombosis.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 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
backgroundTo analyze the risk factors for type 4b acute myocardial infarction (AMI) caused by very late stent thrombosis (VLST) and develop a predictive model using machine learning techniques.
methodsPatients who had a history of coronary stent implantation and developed AMI more than 1 year later, and had undergone coronary angiography were included. Based on the presence of VLST on coronary angiography, patients were classified into the VLST-4b-AMI group and the de novo AMI group. Data including the first coronary stent implantation, drug treatment, baseline hospitalization data, and coronary angiographic findings were collected and compared between the two groups. Logistic regression and Lasso machine learning were used to identify risk factors for VLST-4b-AMI, and a predictive model was developed using machine learning techniques, followed by performance evaluation.
resultsUnivariate logistic regression analysis identified risk factors and protective factors for VLST-4b-AMI. Lasso regression selected 12 variables closely associated with VLST-4b-AMI occurrence. Based on these risk factors, predictive models were developed using eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), and k-nearest neighbors (KNN). The XGBoost model demonstrated the best predictive performance (AUC = 0.724, 95% CI: 0.640–0.809), followed by KNN (AUC = 0.698, 95% CI: 0.614–0.783), and RF (AUC = 0.669, 95% CI: 0.574–0.763). SVM had the lowest performance (AUC = 0.641, 95% CI: 0.547–0.736).
conclusionsThe XGBoost-based machine learning model showed the best predictive performance for VLST-4b-AMI, offering a promising tool for early prediction of this high-risk type of AMI.
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.