ArticleScientific reports2026
Meta-heuristic and machine learning based functional capacity prediction using gait parameters in patients with heart failure.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to predict functional capacity using wearable sensor-based spatiotemporal and kinematic gait parameters, and meta-heuristic-based machine learning approaches in patients with heart failure (HF). This cross-sectional study included 70 patients with HF and assessed functional capacity and gait parameters using the six-minute walk test and a wearable inertial sensor, respectively. The Synthetic Minority Over-Sampling Technique for Regression was employed to increase the number of instances. The optimisation of four machine learning models (XGBoost, LightGBM, Random Forest, CatBoost) was implemented using Simulated Annealing, Genetic Algorithms, Particle Swarm Optimisation (PSO) and Bayesian Optimisation. The model performance was evaluated via 10-fold cross-validation through the R-squared coefficient (R²), root mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), and mean squared error (MSE). The interpretability of the optimal model was investigated using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to explain individual feature contributions. The hybrid PSO-CatBoost model provided better predictive accuracy (R
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.