Literature DB >> 32172622

Value of a Machine Learning Approach for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Young Patients With Hypertension.

Xueyi Wu1, Xinglong Yuan2, Shenghan Zhou2, Lei Song1,3,4, Wei Wang1, Kai Liu1, Ying Qin1, Xiaolu Sun1, Wenjun Ma1, Yubao Zou1, Huimin Zhang1, Xianliang Zhou1, Haiying Wu1, Xiongjing Jiang1, Jun Cai1, Wenbing Chang2.   

Abstract

Risk stratification of young patients with hypertension remains challenging. Generally, machine learning (ML) is considered a promising alternative to traditional methods for clinical predictions because it is capable of processing large amounts of complex data. We, therefore, explored the feasibility of an ML approach for predicting outcomes in young patients with hypertension and compared its performance with that of approaches now commonly used in clinical practice. Baseline clinical data and a composite end point-comprising all-cause death, acute myocardial infarction, coronary artery revascularization, new-onset heart failure, new-onset atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter, sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation, peripheral artery revascularization, new-onset stroke, end-stage renal disease-were evaluated in 508 young patients with hypertension (30.83±6.17 years) who had been treated at a tertiary hospital. Construction of the ML model, which consisted of recursive feature elimination, extreme gradient boosting, and 10-fold cross-validation, was performed at the 33-month follow-up evaluation, and the model's performance was compared with that of the Cox regression and recalibrated Framingham Risk Score models. An 11-variable combination was considered most valuable for predicting outcomes using the ML approach. The C statistic for identifying patients with composite end points was 0.757 (95% CI, 0.660-0.854) for the ML model, whereas for Cox regression model and the recalibrated Framingham Risk Score model it was 0.723 (95% CI, 0.636-0.810) and 0.529 (95% CI, 0.403-0.655). The ML approach was comparable with Cox regression for determining the clinical prognosis of young patients with hypertension and was better than that of the recalibrated Framingham Risk Score model.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cardiovascular disease; chronic kidney failure; machine learning; prognosis; stroke

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32172622     DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.119.13404

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hypertension        ISSN: 0194-911X            Impact factor:   10.190


  10 in total

Review 1.  Utilizing Artificial Intelligence to Enhance Health Equity Among Patients with Heart Failure.

Authors:  Amber E Johnson; LaPrincess C Brewer; Melvin R Echols; Sula Mazimba; Rashmee U Shah; Khadijah Breathett
Journal:  Heart Fail Clin       Date:  2022-03-04       Impact factor: 3.179

2.  GENESIS: Gene-Specific Machine Learning Models for Variants of Uncertain Significance Found in Catecholaminergic Polymorphic Ventricular Tachycardia and Long QT Syndrome-Associated Genes.

Authors:  Rachel L Draelos; Jordan E Ezekian; Farica Zhuang; Mary E Moya-Mendez; Zhushan Zhang; Michael B Rosamilia; Perathu K R Manivannan; Ricardo Henao; Andrew P Landstrom
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2022-03-31

Review 3.  Artificial Intelligence and Hypertension: Recent Advances and Future Outlook.

Authors:  Thanat Chaikijurajai; Luke J Laffin; Wai Hong Wilson Tang
Journal:  Am J Hypertens       Date:  2020-11-03       Impact factor: 3.080

Review 4.  Applications of artificial intelligence for hypertension management.

Authors:  Kelvin Tsoi; Karen Yiu; Helen Lee; Hao-Min Cheng; Tzung-Dau Wang; Jam-Chin Tay; Boon Wee Teo; Yuda Turana; Arieska Ann Soenarta; Guru Prasad Sogunuru; Saulat Siddique; Yook-Chin Chia; Jinho Shin; Chen-Huan Chen; Ji-Guang Wang; Kazuomi Kario
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 3.738

5.  Machine Learning Approaches for Predicting Hypertension and Its Associated Factors Using Population-Level Data From Three South Asian Countries.

Authors:  Sheikh Mohammed Shariful Islam; Ashis Talukder; Md Abdul Awal; Md Muhammad Umer Siddiqui; Md Martuza Ahamad; Benojir Ahammed; Lal B Rawal; Roohallah Alizadehsani; Jemal Abawajy; Liliana Laranjo; Clara K Chow; Ralph Maddison
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-03-31

6.  Machine learning techniques for arrhythmic risk stratification: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Cheuk To Chung; George Bazoukis; Sharen Lee; Ying Liu; Tong Liu; Konstantinos P Letsas; Antonis A Armoundas; Gary Tse
Journal:  Int J Arrhythmia       Date:  2022-04-01

7.  Surgical Methods and Social Factors Are Associated With Long-Term Survival in Follicular Thyroid Carcinoma: Construction and Validation of a Prognostic Model Based on Machine Learning Algorithms.

Authors:  Yaqian Mao; Yanling Huang; Lizhen Xu; Jixing Liang; Wei Lin; Huibin Huang; Liantao Li; Junping Wen; Gang Chen
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-06-21       Impact factor: 5.738

8.  PET-CT and RNA sequencing reveal novel targets for acupuncture-induced lowering of blood pressure in spontaneously hypertensive rats.

Authors:  Jing Li; Chong Peng; Dongjian Lai; Yajing Fang; Daihong Luo; Zunming Zhou; Chenyun Li; Xinsheng Lai
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Machine learning-based risk prediction of malignant arrhythmia in hospitalized patients with heart failure.

Authors:  Qi Wang; Bin Li; Kangyu Chen; Fei Yu; Hao Su; Kai Hu; Zhiquan Liu; Guohong Wu; Ji Yan; Guohai Su
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2021-09-28

Review 10.  How machine learning is impacting research in atrial fibrillation: implications for risk prediction and future management.

Authors:  Ivan Olier; Sandra Ortega-Martorell; Mark Pieroni; Gregory Y H Lip
Journal:  Cardiovasc Res       Date:  2021-06-16       Impact factor: 10.787

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.