Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42566409›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2026

CAMI-DM: Development and validation of a multi-algorithm model for in-hospital mortality risk prediction in diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction - The China acute myocardial infarction registry.

Zuoxiang Wang, Zheng Yin, Junxing Lv, Sheng Zhao, Zhengqing Ba, Jingang Yang, Haiyan Xu, Xiaojin Gao, Yongjian Wu, Yuejin Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS 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.

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

10 authors.

Zuoxiang WangDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7728-5006
Zheng YinDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Junxing LvDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Sheng ZhaoDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Zhengqing BaDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jingang YangDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Haiyan XuDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Xiaojin GaoDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yongjian WuDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yuejin YangDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients with diabetes constitute a substantial proportion of those with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and exhibit distinct pathophysiological characteristics. However, existing guideline-recommended traditional and generic risk prediction models show limited performance in this specific population. Based on the China Acute Myocardial Infarction (CAMI) registry, 6,091 diabetic patients with AMI were enrolled and randomly divided into training and test sets (8:2). A comprehensive set of 62 multidimensional candidate features was extracted, and three feature selection strategies were applied to develop 12 machine learning models across six algorithm categories. All models underwent hyperparameter tuning via five-fold cross-validation in the training set, with the optimal combination selected according to the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Two post-hoc ensemble strategies-stacking and probability averaging-were then employed to explore various combinations of top-performing models from different algorithm categories. Across six algorithm categories, the predictive models developed using 11 features selected by Elastic Net had the optimal performance. After evaluating various fusion strategies, the ensembled GLM + TabNet model was ultimately selected as the CAMI-DM model 2.0, achieving an AUROC of 0.875 in the test set. To balance the predictive performance and model simplicity, the CAMI-DM model 1.0 adopted a linear framework and was developed using five features from consensus feature selection Strategy, with an AUROC of 0.821 in the test set. Comparative analyses revealed that the CAMI-DM 2.0 outperformed CAMI-DM 1.0 in terms of discrimination, accuracy, calibration, and clinical net benefit. Furthermore, CAMI-DM 1.0, with its simplified structure, still outperformed the GRACE score in the overall predictive performance and generalizability. This study focused on the specific population of AMI patients with diabetes, and for the first time developed two dedicated models to predict in-hospital mortality risk.

Identifiers

PMID42566409
PMCPMC13450723

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.