Short-term and long-term outcome prediction for patients with coronary artery disease using machine learning and comprehensive multi-center patient data
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Revascularization decision-making for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) can benefit from accurate patient outcome prediction. While previous studies have employed data-driven methods including machine learning (ML) to develop prediction models, they were mostly based on small patient cohorts with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, limited feature sets, and only internal validation. Objectives To develop and externally validate ML-based models to predict a wide range of short- and long-term outcomes for patients with obstructive CAD using large-scale multi-center patient data. Methods Comprehensive data from patients with obstructive CAD who underwent coronary angiography at three hospitals in Alberta, Canada between 2009 and 2019 were extracted from the APPROACH Registry and linked administrative health databases. To predict all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events at 90 days, 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years, over 12,000 features were considered in an extensive ML framework that employed rigorous hyperparameter tuning, calibration, algorithmic bias assessment, and external validation. In addition to traditional ML models, we employed a generative transformer-based tabular foundation model, TabPFN. To increase the clinical utility of these prediction models, we also performed a secondary analysis that investigated the impact of the exclusion of angiography data on prediction performance. Results A total of 44,462 catheterizations from 38,767 unique patients were included in the study. The median areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of the best models, mostly TabPFNs, in external validation ranged from 0.797 to 0.845 and 0.694 to 0.753 for mortality and MACE, respectively. CAD factors, angiography results, and patient history were the most influential feature groups. The algorithmic bias assessment focusing on patient sex showed that the models were mostly fair. The secondary analysis showed that prediction performance degraded slightly when angiography features were excluded. Conclusions The prediction performance reported in this study is state-of-the-art compared to previous studies. The large sample size, extensive feature set, external validation, and transformer architecture led to personalized models with robust performance. The models from this study have the potential to improve coronary revascularization decision-making and patient outcomes via accurate prognosis.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».