Key result
A machine learning model based on non-exercise clinical features predicted the heart rate at the anaerobic threshold with a mean absolute error of 7.7 bpm, outperforming standard equations.
Why the study?
Determining target heart rate at the anaerobic threshold usually requires cardiopulmonary exercise testing, motivating development of a machine learning model to predict it solely from non-exercise clinical features.
Does a machine learning model based on non-exercise clinical features improve the prediction accuracy of heart rate at the anaerobic threshold compared to guideline-recommended equations in individuals undergoing cardiopulmonary exercise testing?
Observational (n=8,228)
Does a machine learning model based on non-exercise clinical features improve the prediction accuracy of heart rate at the anaerobic threshold compared to guideline-recommended equations in individuals undergoing cardiopulmonary exercise testing?
A machine learning model using non-exercise clinical features predicts the heart rate at the anaerobic threshold more accurately than traditional guideline-recommended equations, potentially facilitating cardiac rehabilitation.
Background/Objectives: For effective exercise prescription for patients with cardiovascular disease, it is important to determine the target heart rate at the level of the anaerobic threshold (AT-HR). The AT-HR is mainly determined by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). The aim of this study is to develop a machine learning (ML) model to predict the AT-HR solely from non-exercise clinical features. Methods: From consecutive 21,482 cases of CPET between 2 February 2008 and 1 December 2021, an appropriate subset was selected to train our ML model. Data consisted of 78 features, including age, sex, anthropometry, clinical diagnosis, cardiovascular risk factors, vital signs, blood tests, and echocardiography. We predicted the AT-HR using a ML method called gradient boosting, along with a rank of each feature in terms of its contribution to AT-HR prediction. The accuracy was evaluated by comparing the predicted AT-HR with the target HRs from guideline-recommended equations in terms of the mean absolute error (MAE). Results: A total of 8228 participants included healthy individuals and patients with cardiovascular disease and were 62 ± 15 years in mean age (69% male). The MAE of the AT-HR by the ML-based model was 7.7 ± 0.2 bpm, which was significantly smaller than those of the guideline-recommended equations; the results using Karvonen formulas with the coefficients 0.7 and 0.4 were 34.5 ± 0.3 bpm and 11.9 ± 0.2 bpm, respectively, and the results using simpler formulas, rest HR + 10 and +20 bpm, were 15.9 ± 0.3 and 9.7 ± 0.2 bpm, respectively. The feature ranking method revealed that the features that make a significant contribution to AT-HR prediction include the resting heart rate, age, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), resting systolic blood pressure, highly sensitive C-reactive protein (hsCRP), cardiovascular disease diagnosis, and β-blockers, in that order. Prediction accuracy with the top 10 to 20 features was comparable to that with all features. Conclusions: An accurate prediction model of the AT-HR from non-exercise clinical features was proposed. We expect that it will facilitate performing cardiac rehabilitation. The feature selection technique newly unveiled some major determinants of AT-HR, such as NT-proBNP and hsCRP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nakayama et al. (2024) conducted an observational in Cardiovascular disease and healthy individuals (n=8,228). Machine learning model (gradient boosting) vs. Guideline-recommended equations was evaluated on Mean absolute error (MAE) of the predicted heart rate at the anaerobic threshold. A machine learning model based on non-exercise clinical features predicted the heart rate at the anaerobic threshold with a mean absolute error of 7.7 bpm, outperforming standard equations.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: