ArticleScientific reports2026
A preprocessing-enhanced stacking classifier for generalized cardiovascular disease detection across diverse datasets.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) remain a major global health challenge, requiring early-detection models that are both accurate and generalizable across diverse data settings. This study introduces a preprocessing-enhanced stacking ensemble for binary CVD prediction, explicitly designed to improve robustness under heterogeneous feature distributions. The preprocessing pipeline incorporates feature transformation, derived attribute construction, encoding, and K-modes clustering, all applied after strict train–test separation to preserve evaluation validity. The proposed stacking architecture integrates three complementary tree-based base learners i.e., Random Forest, Decision Tree, and Extra Trees with Logistic Regression as a meta-learner to aggregate out-of-fold predictions. The framework was evaluated on three heterogeneous datasets. The ensemble achieved accuracies of 93.26%, 72%, and 99% on Datasets I, II, and III, respectively, with performance stability confirmed using 95% confidence intervals across five random seeds. Statistical significance analysis using McNemar’s test demonstrated that the proposed model significantly outperformed several strong baselines (p < 0.05), including Random Forest, Logistic Regression, and XGBoost on Dataset I; CNN on Dataset II; and Decision Tree and Logistic Regression on Dataset III. These results indicate that the proposed framework maintains consistent performance across varying data modalities, noise levels, and feature structures.
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.