ArticleMedComm2026
Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Mortality in Patients With Mitral Regurgitation: Results From Two Nationwide, Prospective Studies.
Article in MedComm, 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mitral regurgitation (MR) is among the most prevalent valvular heart diseases. We developed and externally validated a machine learning (ML)-based mortality prediction model for patients with significant MR. From the ChinaValvular Heart Disease (China-VHD) registry, 6323 patients with moderate or greater MR were randomly split 7:3 into training and internal validation sets. Variables selected concordantly by Cox stepwise regression, Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO)-penalized Cox regression, and Boruta were retained. Seventeen ML and traditional models were compared. The final model was tested in the internal set and an external cohort of 4658 patients from the China Elderly Valve Disease (China-DVD) study. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis assessed interpretability. Fifteen predictors were identified. CatBoost performed best, with AUCs of 0.783 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.751-0.815) internally and 0.703 (0.678-0.728) externally, outperforming Cox (0.699), MitraScore (0.620), and EuroSCORE II (0.679). Age, NYHA class, and left ventricular ejection fraction were the top predictors. The model effectively distinguished high-risk from low-risk patients internally (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 5.49,
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.