Machine learning-based prediction of 1-year all-cause mortality in patients undergoing CRT implantation: validation of the SEMMELWEIS-CRT score in the European CRT Survey I dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims We aimed to externally validate the SEMMELWEIS-CRT score for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality in the European Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) Survey I dataset—a large multi-centre cohort of patients undergoing CRT implantation. Methods and results The SEMMELWEIS-CRT score is a machine learning-based tool trained for predicting all-cause mortality in patients undergoing CRT implantation. This tool demonstrated impressive performance during internal validation but has not yet been validated externally. To this end, we applied it to the data of 1367 patients from the European CRT Survey I dataset. The SEMMELWEIS-CRT predicted 1-year mortality with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.729 (0.682–0.776), which concurred with the performance measured during internal validation [AUC: 0.768 (0.674–0.861), P = 0.466]. Moreover, the SEMMELWEIS-CRT score outperformed multiple conventional statistics-based risk scores, and we demonstrated that a higher predicted probability is not only associated with a higher risk of death [odds ratio (OR): 1.081 (1.061–1.101), P < 0.001] but also with an increased risk of hospitalizations for any cause [OR: 1.013 (1.002–1.025), P = 0.020] or for heart failure [OR: 1.033 (1.015–1.052), P < 0.001], a less than 5% improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction [OR: 1.033 (1.021–1.047), P < 0.001], and lack of improvement in New York Heart Association functional class compared with baseline [OR: 1.018 (1.006–1.029), P = 0.003]. Conclusion In the European CRT Survey I dataset, the SEMMELWEIS-CRT score predicted 1-year all-cause mortality with good discriminatory power, which confirms the generalizability and demonstrates the potential clinical utility of this machine learning-based risk stratification tool.
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 | 0.013 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".