ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2026
Development and Interpretation of Machine Learning Models for Short-Term Functional Recovery and 90-Day Readmission in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Early prediction of functional recovery and post-discharge readmission may support multidisciplinary rehabilitation planning, follow-up stratification, and individualized management in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study aimed to develop and interpret machine learning (ML) models for predicting 1-week functional recovery and 90-day readmission. Methods: A total of 553 CVD patients were randomly assigned to a training cohort (n=388) and a test cohort (n=165). Candidate clinical, functional, and laboratory variables were selected using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression. Ten ML algorithms were trained and compared: logistic regression, support vector machine, neural network, k-nearest neighbors, decision tree, random forest (RF), gradient boosting machine, light gradient boosting machine, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and naïve Bayes. Model performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), precision-recall curves, calibration curves, decision curve analysis, and confusion matrices. Shapley additive explanations values were used for interpretation, and final models were implemented in a Shiny web application. Results: Overall, 361 of 553 patients (65.3%) achieved 1-week functional recovery, and 60 patients (10.8%) experienced 90-day readmission. For 1-week functional recovery, XGBoost achieved test-set AUC 0.856, accuracy 77.0%, sensitivity 76.9%, and specificity 77.2%. Key predictors were Barthel Index, New York Heart Association class, creatinine, serum chloride, and serum sodium. For 90-day readmission, RF achieved test-set AUC 0.662, accuracy 90.9%, sensitivity 22.2%, and specificity 99.3%, with creatinine, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, C-reactive protein, and creatinine clearance as top predictors. Conclusion: ML models showed promise for predicting short-term functional recovery in patients with CVD, while prediction of 90-day readmission remained challenging. The Shiny-based dual-outcome tool may serve as a research prototype to support individualized risk estimation, model interpretation, and multidisciplinary post-discharge management, but external validation and prospective evaluation are required before clinical application.
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.