ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2026
A machine learning model for early risk stratification of 28-day mortality after myocardial infarction.
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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Despite significant improvement in transcatheter therapies, myocardial infarction (MI) retains a high burden of morbidity and mortality. While several scores have been developed, an established risk model tailored to predict short-term mortality after MI is lacking. Methods and results: In this study, we leveraged real-world data to develop a machine learning (ML) model for predicting 28-day mortality after MI, relying on clinical data collected within the first 24 h of hospitalization. From the Augsburg Myocardial Infarction Registry, 14 725 MI patients surviving the first 24 h of the acute event were included: 80% in the training set for model development to train a Gradient Boosting Machine while the 20% remaining served as test set. A sequential feature selection process retained variables as long as their addition improved AUPRC within 5-fold cross-validation on the train set. We then assessed our model on the test set and performed an external validation on 1328 patients from the Brandenburg Myocardial Infarction Registry. Shapley additive explanations values were used to explain the ML model's predictions. Our model retained six variables including age, systolic blood pressure, admission levels of glucose, creatinine, leucocytes, and whether the patient had a prehospital cardiac arrest. It exhibited good calibration and discrimination ability on the internal (AUROC=0.82) and external validation (AUROC=0.85) and outperformed common scores like GRACE, CADILLAC, and TIMI ( Conclusion: The results highlight the potential of our model to ease the detection of patients at high risk, allowing targeted early intervention to improve their outcome, and to contribute to improved precision medicine.
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.