ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Machine learning prediction of hypertension integrating polygenic risk scores in inner Eurasian populations.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Arterial hypertension is one of the leading contributors to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality worldwide. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of polygenic risk scores (PRS) for hypertension in Russia and to develop predictive models integrating PRS and questionnaire-based risk factors for disease risk assessment. Methods: We analyzed a cohort of 175,704 individuals from multiethnic inner Eurasian populations. Published PRS for systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and pulse pressure were evaluated for association with hypertension across different ancestry groups. Predictive models integrating PRS and questionnaire-derived risk factors were developed using multiple machine learning tools, including neural networks. Results: PRSs for systolic and diastolic blood pressure showed marked differences between the top and bottom deciles of the PRS distribution, with odds ratios of 6.20 (95% CI: 5.22-7.36) and 6.71 (95% CI: 5.58-8.06), respectively. The PRS for pulse pressure was also strongly associated with hypertension, with an odds ratio of 3.71 (95% CI: 3.16-4.35). All evaluated PRSs were consistently associated with hypertension across several ancestry groups represented in Russia and neighboring regions, including East Slavic populations (Russians, Belarusians, and Ukrainians), populations of the Volga-Ural region, such as Tatars, and West Asian-related groups represented by Armenians and Hemshins. A neural network model integrating PRSs with questionnaire-based risk factors achieved a test ROC-AUC of 0.8245 (95% CI: 0.8114-0.8362), demonstrating robust discriminatory performance for arterial hypertension. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that previously published PRSs for systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and pulse pressure retain substantial predictive value across diverse inner Eurasian populations and provide complementary information beyond conventional questionnaire-based risk factors. Among the evaluated scores, the systolic blood pressure PRS showed the most robust and consistent transferability, remaining informative even in several genetically diverse and underpowered cohorts.
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.