MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964149875 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jez177

Machine learning predicts per-vessel early coronary revascularization after fast myocardial perfusion SPECT: results from multicentre REFINE SPECT registry

2019· article· en· W2964149875 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of HealthTaipei Veterans General HospitalCedars-Sinai Medical Center
KeywordsMyocardial perfusion imagingMedicineCoronary artery diseaseReceiver operating characteristicRevascularizationNuclear medicineArea under the curvePerfusionSingle-photon emission computed tomographyConfidence intervalCardiologyCoronary angiographySpect imagingInternal medicineRadiologyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To optimize per-vessel prediction of early coronary revascularization (ECR) within 90 days after fast single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) using machine learning (ML) and introduce a method for a patient-specific explanation of ML results in a clinical setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1980 patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) underwent stress/rest 99mTc-sestamibi/tetrofosmin MPI with new-generation SPECT scanners were included. All patients had invasive coronary angiography within 6 months after SPECT MPI. ML utilized 18 clinical, 9 stress test, and 28 imaging variables to predict per-vessel and per-patient ECR with 10-fold cross-validation. Area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUC) of ML was compared with standard quantitative analysis [total perfusion deficit (TPD)] and expert interpretation. ECR was performed in 958 patients (48%). Per-vessel, the AUC of ECR prediction by ML (AUC 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.77, 0.80]) was higher than by regional stress TPD (0.71, [0.70, 0.73]), combined-view stress TPD (AUC 0.71, 95% CI [0.69, 0.72]), or ischaemic TPD (AUC 0.72, 95% CI [0.71, 0.74]), all P < 0.001. Per-patient, the AUC of ECR prediction by ML (AUC 0.81, 95% CI [0.79, 0.83]) was higher than that of stress TPD, combined-view TPD, and ischaemic TPD, all P < 0.001. ML also outperformed nuclear cardiologists' expert interpretation of MPI for the prediction of early revascularization performance. A method to explain ML prediction for an individual patient was also developed. CONCLUSION: In patients with suspected CAD, the prediction of ECR by ML outperformed automatic MPI quantitation by TPDs (per-vessel and per-patient) or nuclear cardiologists' expert interpretation (per-patient).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it