↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Cardiovascular risk prediction: a comparative study of Framingham and quantum neural network based approach

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
Title
Cardiovascular risk prediction: a comparative study of Framingham and quantum neural network based approach
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, July 2016
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s108203
Pubmed ID
Authors

Renu Narain, Sanjai Saxena, Achal Kumar Goyal

Abstract

Currently cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the main cause of death worldwide. Disease risk estimates can be used as prognostic information and support for treating CVDs. The commonly used Framingham risk score (FRS) for CVD prediction is outdated for the modern population, so FRS may not be accurate enough. In this paper, a novel CVD prediction system based on machine learning is proposed. This study has been conducted with the data of 689 patients showing symptoms of CVD. Furthermore, the dataset of 5,209 CVD patients of the famous Framingham study has been used for validation purposes. Each patient's parameters have been analyzed by physicians in order to make a diagnosis. The proposed system uses the quantum neural network for machine learning. This system learns and recognizes the pattern of CVD. The proposed system has been experimentally evaluated and compared with FRS. During testing, patients' data in combination with the doctors' diagnosis (predictions) are used for evaluation and validation. The proposed system achieved 98.57% accuracy in predicting the CVD risk. The CVD risk predictions by the proposed system, using the dataset of the Framingham study, confirmed the potential risk of death, deaths which actually occurred and had been recorded as due to myocardial infarction and coronary heart disease in the dataset of the Framingham study. The accuracy of the proposed system is significantly higher than FRS and other existing approaches. The proposed system will serve as an excellent tool for a medical practitioner in predicting the risk of CVD. This system will be serving as an aid to medical practitioners for planning better medication and treatment strategies. An early diagnosis may be effectively made by using this system. An overall accuracy of 98.57% has been achieved in predicting the risk level. The accuracy is considerably higher compared to the other existing approaches. Thus, this system must be used instead of the well-known FRS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 104 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 16%
Student > Bachelor 16 15%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Other 7 7%
Other 22 21%
Unknown 21 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 27 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 18%
Engineering 9 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 30 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 January 2017.
All research outputs
#3,127,597
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#156
of 1,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,141
of 367,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#8
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,764 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 367,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.