Evidence mapPaperPMID 42597157Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026

Comparing machine learning models and traditional approaches for predicting obstructive coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jingjing Guo, Chenggong Bao, Lihong Gong, Zhe Zhang

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jingjing Guo *The First Clinical College, Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Chenggong Bao *The First Clinical College, Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Lihong GongKey Laboratory of Ministry of Education for TCM Viscera-State Theory and Applications, Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Zhe ZhangKey Laboratory of Ministry of Education for TCM Viscera-State Theory and Applications, Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Obstructive coronary artery disease (oCAD) is a major cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and accurate prediction is essential for guiding clinical decision-making and secondary prevention. However, the potential of machine learning (ML) models for predicting oCAD remains insufficiently explored; therefore, this study aimed to compare the performance of ML methods with traditional approaches and evaluate differences among ML algorithm classes. Methods: A systematic search of EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and PubMed was conducted from inception to February 9, 2026. Risk of bias was assessed using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed to pool AUCs of ML algorithms and compare the predictive performance of ML models with traditional approaches for oCAD. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were used to explore heterogeneity. Results: A total of 41 studies were included in the review and meta-analysis. ML models showed significantly higher predictive performance than traditional approaches in 12 studies, although with substantial heterogeneity (MD: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.05-0.13; Conclusions: ML shows promising discrimination relative to traditional scores. Future studies should emphasize adequate sample-size calculation, appropriate feature-selection strategies, and standardized handling of missing data and focus on developing and validating ML models based on accessible and noninvasive data sources.

Indexed as

coronary artery diseasemachine learningmeta-analysisobstructive coronary artery diseasesystematic review

Identifiers

PMID42597157
PMCPMC13467866

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.