A Review of Machine Learning Techniques Used in the Prediction of Heart Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart disease stands as a principal cause of death worldwide, and its early prediction is essential for effective patient management and the reduction of healthcare expenditures.In this context, machine learning (ML) has emerged as a transformative tool in the healthcare sector, demonstrating a profound capability to discern intricate data patterns and furnish accurate prognostic assessments.The application of ML in cardiology is instrumental for risk prediction, early detection, and the customization of treatment protocols.The current study systematically reviews the spectrum of ML approaches applied to the prediction of heart disease, spanning supervised, unsupervised, reinforcement, and transfer learning methodologies.Data from prominent repositories such as Kaggle and the UCI Machine Learning Repository were employed to evaluate the performance of various ML algorithms, with key metrics including accuracy, sensitivity, and the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC-ROC).Influential predictors, namely age, gender, cholesterol levels, blood pressure, and lifestyle factors, were integral to the development of these predictive models.Particular attention was given to the exploration of ensemble methods and deep learning frameworks, which have shown to augment prediction accuracy beyond that of traditional models.This research delineates essential risk factors associated with heart disease and underscores the significance of predictive analytics in the healthcare landscape.With a focus on heterogeneous datasets and analytical techniques, the review aims to inform public health strategies and contribute to the alleviation of healthcare burdens.The elucidated findings highlight the promise of ML, particularly through the utilization of ensemble and deep learning methods, in the precursory prediction of heart disease.Such advancements enable healthcare professionals to make more informed decisions, adopt preventative interventions, and mitigate the overall impact on healthcare systems.This exhaustive review also synthesizes the efficacy and practicality of various ML algorithms, providing a valuable compendium for future research initiatives and promoting the integration of cutting-edge technologies in the management of cardiac health.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".