Risk Prediction of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events Occurrence Within 6 Months After Coronary Revascularization: Machine Learning Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As a major health hazard, the incidence of coronary heart disease has been increasing year by year. Although coronary revascularization, mainly percutaneous coronary intervention, has played an important role in the treatment of coronary heart disease, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) such as recurrent or persistent angina pectoris after coronary revascularization remain a very difficult problem in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: Given the high probability of MACE after coronary revascularization, the aim of this study was to develop and validate a predictive model for MACE occurrence within 6 months based on machine learning algorithms. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed including 1004 patients who had undergone coronary revascularization at The People's Hospital of Liaoning Province and Affiliated Hospital of Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine from June 2019 to December 2020. According to the characteristics of available data, an oversampling strategy was adopted for initial preprocessing. We then employed six machine learning algorithms, including decision tree, random forest, logistic regression, naïve Bayes, support vector machine, and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), to develop prediction models for MACE depending on clinical information and 6-month follow-up information. Among all samples, 70% were randomly selected for training and the remaining 30% were used for model validation. Model performance was assessed based on accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, confusion matrix, area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), and visualization of the ROC curve. RESULTS: Univariate analysis showed that 21 patient characteristic variables were statistically significant (P<.05) between the groups without and with MACE. Coupled with these significant factors, among the six machine learning algorithms, XGBoost stood out with an accuracy of 0.7788, precision of 0.8058, recall of 0.7345, F1-score of 0.7685, and AUC of 0.8599. Further exploration of the models to identify factors affecting the occurrence of MACE revealed that use of anticoagulant drugs and course of the disease consistently ranked in the top two predictive factors in three developed models. CONCLUSIONS: The machine learning risk models constructed in this study can achieve acceptable performance of MACE prediction, with XGBoost performing the best, providing a valuable reference for pointed intervention and clinical decision-making in MACE prevention.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".