MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307831606 · doi:10.1016/j.jacasi.2022.07.007

Machine Learning Risk Prediction for Incident Heart Failure in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

2022· article· en· W4307831606 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

VenueJACC Asia · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersAstellas PharmaBayer HealthCarePfizerJapan Agency for Medical Research and DevelopmentBoehringer IngelheimAstraZenecaBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationInternal medicineFramingham Risk ScoreCardiologyEjection fractionHeart failureReceiver operating characteristicCohortFramingham Heart StudyProspective cohort studyIncidence (geometry)CreatinineMathematicsDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atrial fibrillation (AF) increases the risk of heart failure (HF); however, little focus is placed on the risk stratification for, and prevention of, incident HF in patients with AF. This study aimed to construct and validate a machine learning (ML) prediction model for HF hospitalization in patients with AF. The Fushimi AF Registry is a community-based prospective survey of patients with AF in Fushimi-ku, Kyoto, Japan. We divided the data set of the registry into derivation (n = 2,383) and validation (n = 2,011) cohorts. An ML model was built to predict the incidence of HF hospitalization using the derivation cohort, and predictive ability was examined using the validation cohort. HF hospitalization occurred in 606 patients (14%) during a median follow-up period of 4.4 years in the entire registry. Data of transthoracic echocardiography and biomarkers were frequently nominated as important predictive variables across all 6 ML models. The ML model based on a random forest algorithm using 7 variables (age, history of HF, creatinine clearance, cardiothoracic ratio on x-ray, left ventricular [LV] ejection fraction, LV end-systolic diameter, and LV asynergy) had high prediction performance (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve [AUC]: 0.75) and was significantly superior to the Framingham HF risk model (AUC: 0.67; P < 0.001). Based on Kaplan-Meier curves, the ML model could stratify the risk of HF hospitalization during the follow-up period (log-rank; P < 0.001). The ML model revealed important predictors and helped us to stratify the risk of HF, providing opportunities for the prevention of HF in patients with AF.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.339 · 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