ArticleBMJ open2025
Comparison of cardiovascular risk prediction models developed using machine learning based on data from a Sri Lankan cohort with World Health Organization risk charts for predicting cardiovascular risk among Sri Lankans: a cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of venous thrombosis risk prediction model and scale for lung cancer patients in intensive care unit based on interpretable machine learning.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- A clinician-oriented machine learning model for adult asthma exacerbation prediction: comparative analysis of nine algorithms.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Application of Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines to Estimate Fatty Liver Index in Healthy Young Taiwanese Men.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Machine Learning-Based Ensemble Predictive Model for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention.The International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc · 2026Article
- Development and validation of machine learning nomograms for predicting mortality after cardiac valve surgery.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionModels derived from non-Sri Lankan cohorts are used for cardiovascular (CV) risk stratification of Sri Lankans.
objectiveTo develop a CV risk prediction model using machine learning (ML) based on data from a Sri Lankan cohort followed up for 10 years, and to compare the predictions with WHO risk charts.
designCohort study.
settingThe Ragama Health Study (RHS), an ongoing, prospective, population-based cohort study of patients randomly selected from the Ragama Medical Office of Heath area, Sri Lanka, focusing on the epidemiology of non-communicable diseases, was used to develop the model. The external validation cohort included patients admitted to Colombo North Teaching Hospital (CNTH), a tertiary care hospital in Sri Lanka, from January 2019 through August 2020.
participantsAll RHS participants, aged 40-64 years in 2007, without cardiovascular disease (CVD) at baseline, who had complete data of 10-year outcome by 2017, were used for model development. Patients aged 40-74 years admitted to CNTH during the study period with incident CV events or a disease other than an acute CV event (CVE) with complete data for CVD risk calculation were used for external validation of the model.
methodsUsing the follow-up data of the cohort, we developed two ML models for predicting 10-year CV risk using six conventional CV risk variables (age, gender, smoking status, systolic blood pressure, history of diabetes, and total cholesterol level) and all available variables (n=75). The ML models were derived using classification algorithms of the supervised learning technique. We compared the predictive performance of our ML models with WHO risk charts (2019, Southeast Asia) using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC-ROC) and calibration plots. We validated the 6-variable model in an external hospital-based cohort.
resultsOf the 2596 participants in the baseline cohort, 179 incident CVEs were observed over 10 years. WHO risk charts predicted only 10 CVEs (AUC-ROC: 0.51, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.60), while the new 6-variable ML model predicted 125 CVEs (AUC-ROC: 0.72, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.78) and the 75-variable ML model predicted 124 CVEs (AUC-ROC: 0.74, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.80). Calibration results (Hosmer-Lemeshow test) for the 6-variable ML model and the WHO risk charts were χ
conclusionsML-based models derived from a cohort of Sri Lankans improved the overall accuracy of CV-risk prediction compared with the WHO risk charts for this cohort of Southeast Asians.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.