2020
DOI: 10.1007/s10741-020-10007-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Machine learning versus conventional clinical methods in guiding management of heart failure patients—a systematic review

Abstract: Machine learning (ML) algorithms “learn” information directly from data, and their performance improves proportionally with the number of high-quality samples. The aim of our systematic review is to present the state of the art regarding the implementation of ML techniques in the management of heart failure (HF) patients. We manually searched MEDLINE and Cochrane databases as well the reference lists of the relevant review studies and included studies. Our search retrieved 122 relevant studies. These studies m… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
53
1
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 71 publications
(55 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
53
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed, HF is often complicated by various co‐morbidities that adversely affect prognosis 9–13 . Therefore, targeting co‐morbidities has been increasingly advocated as being relevant to HF care 14 . According to the ESC Heart Failure Pilot Survey, 74% of patients with HF had at least one co‐morbidity, and HF patients commonly have multiple co‐morbidities 15 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, HF is often complicated by various co‐morbidities that adversely affect prognosis 9–13 . Therefore, targeting co‐morbidities has been increasingly advocated as being relevant to HF care 14 . According to the ESC Heart Failure Pilot Survey, 74% of patients with HF had at least one co‐morbidity, and HF patients commonly have multiple co‐morbidities 15 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Risk stratification in HF is an important clinical problem ( 24 , 25 ). Previous studies have elucidated that the demographics of patients with HFmrEF lied in between those of HFpEF and HFrEF patients, but in general were more similar to HFpEF patients, with a heavier burden of hypertension and atrial fibrillation/flutter ( 10 , 12 , 13 , 26 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is difficult and time consuming. In fact, the black-box issue has been a major reason for the slow adoption of machine learning in clinical practice, despite machine learning often producing the highest prediction accuracy among all predictive modeling methods [33,[123][124][125][126][127].…”
Section: Gap 2: No Information Given On the Reason Why A Patient Is Deemed High Risk And The Potential Interventions To Reduce The Riskmentioning
confidence: 99%