Machine Learning – Enhanced Baseline Risk Prediction Models for Cancer Therapy Related Cardiac Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of Methodological Quality
Clicks: 1
ID: 324579
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
1 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #49 of 55 articles by views in European Heart Journal - Digital Health
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Background Cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) is a prevalent complication with adverse clinical implications. Guidelines have emphasised the need for reliable baseline risk prediction to guide prevention strategies. While machine learning (ML) has shown promise in cardiovascular medicine, the readiness of ML-based prognostic models for baseline CTRCD risk prediction in cardio-oncology remains unclear. Aim To systematically review and critically appraise the performance, methodological quality, and clinical applicability of ML-based models for predicting baseline CTRCD risk. Methods A search on Embase and Medline was conducted up to May 2026. Eligible studies used ML algorithms to estimate CTRCD risk prior to cancer treatment. Data were extracted using an adapted version of the CHARMS checklist. Risk of bias (ROB) and reporting quality were assessed using PROBAST and TRIPOD+AI. Results Nine studies were included. Seven studies included novel models using multiple clinical and imaging predictors, while two repurposed or validated existing AI-enhanced electrocardiography (ECG) models. The levels of discrimination were at least moderate (AUC 0.65–0.88), calibration was only reported in two studies, and external validation in one. Multiparametric models showed higher performance metrics than ECG-only models but were methodologically constrained. Overall, most studies were limited by variability in outcome definitions, low event rates, limited transparency in reporting, and a lack of reproducibility measures. Conclusions Current ML-based models for predicting CTRCD remain underdeveloped for clinical use. The present findings highlight the need for further work to optimise models by incorporating rigorous study designs, with emphasis on methodological clarity, standardised outcome definitions, and external validation to improve reproducibility.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7202142178
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | María Sol Andrés, Vijay Maharahan, Alexandra Pons Rivarola, Luis Garcia Rodriguez, Franck Thuny, Sivatharshini Ramalingam, Matilda Howe, Mamas A Mamas, Amitava Banerjee, Charlotte Manisty, Arjun K Ghosh, Aditya S. Bharadwaj, Alexander R Lyon, Mohamed O. Mohamed |
| Journal | European Heart Journal - Digital Health |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/ehjdh/ztag127
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.