ArticleDigital health
A two-phase machine learning framework for coronary heart disease risk prediction: Integrating population ecology with individual pathophysiology.
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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Coronary heart disease (CHD) shows significant regional variations that cannot be fully explained by individual risk factors alone, suggesting the need for an analytical framework that integrates macro-level environmental influences with individual-level pathophysiology. This study developed and validated a novel two-phase, interpretable machine learning (ML) framework for identifying and validating multi-level predictors of CHD risk. Methods: In Phase 1 (Population-Level Discovery), we employed a consensus-driven Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) pipeline across 12 regression algorithms (e.g., XGBoost, Random Forest, ElasticNet) on integrated ecological data from the Global Burden of Disease study (socioeconomic/environmental variables) and CDC WONDER (age-adjusted CHD mortality rates across US states, 2018-2021). Features were selected based on triangulation of the elbow method, one-standard-error rule, and stability selection. In Phase 2 (Individual-Level Validation), the prioritized features were mapped to individual-level data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS, 2018-2020 waves). We trained and optimized 10 classification algorithms (e.g., ExtraTrees, XGBoost, SVM) to predict binary CHD status, evaluating performance via discrimination (AUROC), calibration (calibration curves), and clinical utility (Decision Curve Analysis). Model interpretability was achieved using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Results: In Phase 1, XGBoost demonstrated superior performance for predicting state-level mortality (Test R Conclusions: This study presents a robust methodological framework that successfully links population-level ecological determinants with individual-level clinical risk. The findings underscore that a comprehensive understanding of CHD etiology requires simultaneous consideration of environmental context and individual biology. The interpretable ML pipeline not only provides accurate predictions but also generates actionable insights for targeted public health interventions and personalized risk stratification, offering a roadmap for two-phase analysis of complex chronic diseases.
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.