ArticleBMJ digital health & AI2025
Development and prospective evaluation of a machine learning model to predict serious cardiac outcomes among paediatric cardiac inpatients.
Article in BMJ digital health & AI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A next-generation prediction risk model for acute myocardial infarction: Derivation and validation in a multi-centre cohort.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2026Article
- TRIAGE: Trustworthy Reporting and Assessment for Clinical Gain and Effectiveness of AI Models.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Objectives were to develop a machine learning (ML) model based on electronic health record data to predict the risk of a serious cardiac outcome within the next 3 months among patients admitted to the cardiology service using retrospective data, and to evaluate the model prospectively in a silent trial (predictions not provided to clinicians). Methods and analysis: Admissions between 2 June 2018 to 21 August 2023 (retrospective) and 10 May 2024 to 26 October 2024 (prospective) to the cardiology service were included. Data were a curated and validated source named SickKids Enterprise-wide Data in Azure Repository. Prediction time was the morning following admission. The label was a composite outcome consisting of ventricular assist device procedure, heart transplant waitlisting or death within 3 months. We trained models using L2-regularised logistic regression, LightGBM and XGBoost. Training cohorts include the target cohort and all inpatient admissions. Results: The best-performing model in the retrospective phase was LightGBM trained on all inpatients. There were 51 571 admissions used for model development in the retrospective phase and 515 admissions in the prospective silent trial. The number of features in the final model was 7553. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.88 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.89) for retrospective and 0.82 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.83) for prospective silent trial phases. Based on a threshold selected during the retrospective phase, silent trial positive and negative predictive values were 0.19 and 0.97, respectively. Conclusions: We created an ML model to predict serious cardiac outcomes using a deployment-aware framework leveraging real-world data. Postdeployment evaluation will be an important future goal.
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.