ArticleJMIR formative research2026
An In-Hospital Mortality Risk Model for Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Based on Machine Learning: Cohort Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIschemic heart disease remains the leading cause of death worldwide. Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains the primary surgical treatment for ischemic heart disease. There is currently a lack of highly accurate and widely applicable models for assessing the risk of postoperative mortality following CABG.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop and validate an in-hospital mortality risk prediction system for patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) by using machine learning algorithms and to compare its performance with the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II (EuroSCORE II) and Sino System for Coronary Operative Risk Evaluation (SinoSCORE).
methodsBetween January 2017 and December 2020, 21,443 patients undergoing CABG in the Chinese Cardiac Surgery Registry were included. Patients were randomly divided into training (n=17,753) and test (n=3690) cohorts. We addressed class imbalance using the synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) and optimized hyperparameters via grid search. Fifteen machine learning algorithms were developed to predict in-hospital mortality. Performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration metrics (Brier score), and decision curve analysis, and was compared against EuroSCORE II and SinoSCORE.
resultsA total of 21,443 patients were included. Overall, in-hospital mortality was 2.1% (n=450). The Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) model achieved the best performance with an AUC of 0.850 in the training cohort and 0.782 in the independent test cohort (this cohort was independent and not involved in model construction). While EuroSCORE II showed an AUC of 0.722 and SinoSCORE showed an AUC of 0.726 in the test cohort, the XGBoost model demonstrated superior discrimination and calibration (P<.05).
conclusionsOur study developed and validated a machine learning-based risk prediction model for in-hospital mortality after CABG by using a large-scale Chinese multicenter registry. Among the algorithms tested, the XGBoost model demonstrated superior discrimination and calibration compared with the traditional EuroSCORE II and SinoSCORE, suggesting that locally calibrated models may better capture the risk profile of Chinese patients. The derived 7-variable web calculator may serve as an exploratory auxiliary tool to provide a preliminary reference for bedside risk stratification, though its direct impact on surgical decision-making requires further prospective validation. Future research should focus on independent test cohorts across diverse hospital tiers to ensure broad generalizability.
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.