Abstract
Background: Predicting cardiac arrest is crucial for timely intervention and improved patient
outcomes. Machine learning has yielded astounding results by offering tailored prediction analyses
on complex data. Despite advancements in medical expert systems, there remains a need for a
comprehensive analysis of their effectiveness and limitations in cardiac arrest prediction. This need
arises because there are not enough existing studies that thoroughly cover the topic.
Objective: The systematic review aims to analyze the existing literature on medical expert systems
for cardiac arrest prediction, filling the gaps in knowledge and identifying key challenges.
Methods: This paper adopts the PRISMA methodology to conduct a systematic review of 37 publications
obtained from PubMed, Springer, ScienceDirect, and IEEE, published within the last decade.
Careful inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied during the selection process, resulting in a
comprehensive analysis that utilizes five integrated layers- research objectives, data collection, feature
set generation, model training and validation employing various machine learning techniques.
Results and Conclusion: The findings indicate that current studies frequently use ensemble and deep
learning methods to improve machine learning predictions’ accuracy. However, they lack adequate
implementation of proper pre-processing techniques. Further research is needed to address challenges
related to external validation, implementation, and adoption of machine learning models in real
clinical settings, as well as integrating machine learning with AI technologies like NLP. This review
aims to be a valuable resource for both novice and experienced researchers, offering insights into
current methods and potential future recommendations.
Graphical Abstract
[45]
Gao Y, Zhiping L, Tong Tong Z, et al. Effects of two new features of approximate entropy and sample entropy on cardiac arrest prediction. IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS). Lisbon, Portugal. 2015.24-27 May;
[48]
Ho J, Park Y, Carvalho C. DYNACARE: Dynamic cardiac arrest risk estimation. Proc Mach Learn Res 2013; 31: 333-41.
[56]
Akrivos E. Prediction of cardiac arrest in intensive care patients through machine learning, Precision Medicine Powered by pHealth and Connected Health. Springer 2018; pp. 25-9.
[57]
Sakthivel M. Automated detection of cardiac arrest in human beings using auto encoders. Measurement. Sensors 2023; 27: 100792.
[66]
Kudaiberdieva G, Gorenek B, Timuralp B. Heart rate variability as a predictor of sudden cardiac death, Anatolian J Cardiol Anadolu Kardiyol Derg 2007.
[67]
Kennedy CE, Aoki N, Mariscalco M, Turley JP. Using time series analysis to predict cardiac arrest in a PICU. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2015; 16(9): e332-9.
[68]
Alpaydin E. Introduction to Machine Learning. MIT press 2009.
[69]
Han J. Micheline Kamber. (3rd ed.), Data Mining Concepts and Techniques 2012.
[76]
Goodfellow I, Bengio Y, Courville A. Deep Learning. MIT Press 2016.
[84]
Tsao CW, Zaid IA, Alvaro A, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2022 Update: A report from the american heart association. Circulation 2022; 145(8): e153-639.
[86]
Tom M. Mitchell, Machine Learning. McGraw Hill 1997.
[88]
Anurag SR. Tenhunen, pervasive health monitoring based on internet of things: Two case studies. 4th International Conference on Wireless Mobile Communication and Healthcare - Transforming Healthcare Through Innovations in Mobile and Wireless Technologies (MOBIHEALTH). Athens, Greece. 2014.03-05 Nov;
[94]
Guez A, Vincent RD, Avoli M, Pineau J. Treatment of epilepsy via batch-mode reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Tird AAAI Conference on Artifcial Intelligence (AAAI 2008). AAAI Press 2008; pp. 1671-8.
[99]
Nayyar A, Gadhavi L, Zaman N. Machine learning in healthcare: Review, opportunities and challenges. In: Machine Learning and the Internet of Medical Things in Healthcare. Elsevier 2021; pp. 23-45.