Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42395330›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Machine learning-based prediction of dataset-defined myocardial infarction risk: A retrospective computational study for precision cardiovascular risk assessment.

Mohammad Subhi Al-Batah, Abdullah Alourani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Mohammad Subhi Al-BatahDepartment of Computer Science, Faculty of Information Technology, Jadara University, Irbid, Jordan.
Abdullah AlouraniDepartment of Management Information Systems, College of Business and Economics, Qassim University, Buraydah, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to develop and evaluate machine learning and deep learning models for the early prediction of dataset-defined myocardial infarction/heart disease risk using structured demographic, clinical, electrocardiographic, exercise-testing, and angiographic-related variables. The study also aimed to improve the clinical interpretability and methodological transparency of artificial intelligence-based cardiovascular risk prediction. Methods: A retrospective computational modeling design was applied to a merged public heart disease dataset containing 1,888 records and 14 variables. The outcome was the original binary dataset label indicating higher versus lower likelihood of heart disease/heart attack risk. Data preprocessing included missing-value management, categorical encoding, normalization of continuous variables, and stratified model evaluation. Three models were compared: Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, and a multilayer perceptron deep neural network. Model performance was assessed using accuracy, precision/positive predictive value, recall/sensitivity, F1-score, ROC-AUC, and class-wise support. A separate statistical analysis section was added to report descriptive analysis, outcome distribution, feature correlation, and clinically relevant evaluation metrics. Results: The Random Forest model achieved the strongest overall performance, with 97.0% accuracy, 96.0%-97.0% class-wise precision, 96.0%-97.0% class-wise recall, 97.0% F1-score, and ROC-AUC of 0.97. The deep neural network achieved 92.3% accuracy and ROC-AUC of 0.94, whereas the Support Vector Machine achieved 87.0% accuracy and ROC-AUC of 0.87. The balanced distribution of the dataset supported internal model training but may not reflect the lower prevalence of myocardial infarction in real-world healthcare settings. Conclusion: The findings suggest that Random Forest can provide strong internal predictive performance for structured cardiovascular risk classification. However, the outcome represents a dataset-defined surrogate classification rather than independently adjudicated acute myocardial infarction. Therefore, external validation, calibration, comparison with validated clinical risk scores, and prospective evaluation in real-world clinical populations are required before clinical deployment.

Indexed as

cardiovascular risk assessmentclinical decision supportdeep learningdigital healthheart disease predictionmachine learningmyocardial infarction riskrandom forest

Identifiers

PMID42395330
PMCPMC13323641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.