Study | Number of participants | Study design | Algorithm used | Most accurate predictive factors | Potential limitations | Benefits |
Wu et al56 | 382 | Prospective registry analysis | Random Forest |
|
| Identification of predictive factors for appropriate ICD interventions in a cohort of patients suitable for primary prevention ICD insertion. |
Van Hille et al57 | 62 | Retrospective database analysis | Drools and ontology reasoning modules |
|
| Drools and ontology reasoning approaches are efficacious methods for the triage of AF alerts from ICD devices. |
Shakibfar et al29 | 16 022 | Retrospective database analysis | Logistic regression—model 1 Random forest—model 2 |
| – | Prediction of electrical storm using machine learning models based on ICD remote monitoring summaries during episodes. Random forest superior to logistic regression (p<0.01). |
Shakibfar et al 30 | 19 935 | Retrospective cohort study | Random forest and logistic regression |
|
| Use of large-scale random forest showed that daily summaries of ICD measurements in the absence of clinical information can predict short term risk of electrical storm. |
Ross et al58 | 71 948 | Retrospective registry analysis | Random forest and logistic regression |
|
| Random forest can improve identification of mortality and adverse events by dual-chamber ICDs. |
AF, atrial fibrillation; HF, heart failure; IL-6, interleukin-6; LA, left atrium; LV, left ventricle; nsVT, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia; NYHA-4, New York Heart Association Classification 4; VT, ventricular tachycardia.