ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Explainable and High-Performance ECG-Informed Machine Learning and Deep Learning Framework for Cardiovascular Risk Prediction.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Predictive models used for the assessment of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk must not only be highly accurate but also explainable and reliable for clinical decision-making. In this paper, we present a methodological framework for explainable machine learning and deep learning approaches to CVD risk prediction that uses clinically derived electrocardiogram (ECG) features and conventional CVD risk factors. A large synthetic dataset containing 30,000 patient cases was created according to a clinically validated distribution to provide reproducible and privacy-preserving benchmarking. A series of interpretability tests were performed on multiple models of machine learning and deep learning categories within a unified experimental setup. Out of the tested models, XGBoost and BiLSTM provided the highest discrimination capabilities in the machine learning and deep learning categories, respectively. Explaining the predictions via the SHapley Additive explanations (SHAP) approach, calibration of probability estimations, uncertainty quantification, and ablation studies were applied to assess the explainability, reliability, and robustness of the models. We show that the presented framework allows for the production of consistent and interpretable predictions along with the evaluation of the models' explainability and predictive reliability. Instead of focusing on the single-feature importance, this paper presents a reproducible methodological framework for the explainable modeling of CVD risk.
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.