ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Development and internal-external validation of an interpretable machine learning model integrating clinical and polygenic predictors for coronary artery disease: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate primary-prevention risk stratification for coronary artery disease (CAD) remains challenging. We developed and internally validated a framework integrating clinical variables with a polygenic risk score (PRS). Methods: This three-center retrospective cohort included 2,067 adults without baseline CAD. The primary target was 5-year CAD cumulative incidence, with non-coronary death treated as a competing event. Clinical, PRS-only, and integrated cause-specific eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) models were evaluated using leave-one-center-out internal-external validation. Performance assessment included cumulative/dynamic area under the curve (AUC), inverse-probability-of-censoring-weighted Brier score, calibration, and competing-risk decision-curve analysis. PRS associations were estimated using Fine-Gray regression, and model behavior was examined using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Results: During a median follow-up of 6.8 years, 215 participants experienced the primary endpoint; 163 events occurred within 5 years, and the 5-year cumulative incidence was 8.4%. Each 1-SD increase in the principal component-adjusted PRS was associated with the primary endpoint (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.21-1.55; Conclusions: The PRS was independently associated with incident CAD. Integration with clinical variables yielded a modest, statistically uncertain improvement in discrimination and satisfactory calibration during internal-external validation. External validation is required before clinical implementation.
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.