ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2026
Machine learning for prediction of key haemodynamic parameters in pulmonary arterial hypertension.
Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 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
Aims: Machine learning (ML) is increasingly recognized for its ability to identify and structure variables for predictive tasks. Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a progressive disease characterized by elevated mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) with normal pulmonary arterial wedge pressure (PAWP), as assessed by right heart catheterization (RHC). Despite increased awareness, delays between onset of non-specific symptoms and diagnosis continue to hinder early initiation of targeted therapies, leading to poorer outcomes. To develop and evaluate ML models for predicting key haemodynamic parameters in PAH, based on routinely available non-invasive data collected within 8 weeks prior to RHC, as a proof of concept. Methods and results: We analysed data from 181 patients with invasively confirmed PAH, incorporating 56 variables, including demographics, echocardiography, blood gas analyses, 6-min walk distances, laboratory tests, and WHO functional class. An 80/20 train-test split and fivefold cross-validation were applied across multiple ML models, including least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (lasso) regression, ridge regression, k-nearest neighbours, decision trees, random forest, and gradient boosting machine. Lasso achieved best performance for predicting mPAP ( Conclusion: Machine learning models can estimate mPAP and PVR from routine clinical data obtained prior to RHC in patients with confirmed PAH. External validation is required to confirm generalizability and clinical applicability.
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.