Skip to Content
SustainabilitySustainability
  • Article
  • Open Access

31 October 2022

Modified Self-Adaptive Bayesian Algorithm for Smart Heart Disease Prediction in IoT System

,
,
,
,
and
1
Department of Computer Science, University College of Al Jamoum, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah 21421, Saudi Arabia
2
Al-Nahrain Nanorenewable Energy Research Center, Al-Nahrain University, Baghdad 64074, Iraq
3
Department of Computer Science, College of Computer and Information Systems, Umm Al Qura University, Makkah 21421, Saudi Arabia
4
Information Technology Department, University of Technology and Applied Sciences-Shinas, Al-Aqr, Shinas 324, Oman

Abstract

Heart disease (HD) has surpassed all other causes of death in recent years. Estimating one’s risk of developing heart disease is difficult, since it takes both specialized knowledge and practical experience. The collection of sensor information for the diagnosis and prognosis of cardiac disease is a recent application of Internet of Things (IoT) technology in healthcare organizations. Despite the efforts of many scientists, the diagnostic results for HD remain unreliable. To solve this problem, we offer an IoT platform that uses a Modified Self-Adaptive Bayesian algorithm (MSABA) to provide more precise assessments of HD. When the patient wears the smartwatch and pulse sensor device, it records vital signs, including electrocardiogram (ECG) and blood pressure, and sends the data to a computer. The MSABA is used to determine whether the sensor data that has been obtained is normal or abnormal. To retrieve the features, the kernel discriminant analysis (KDA) is used. By contrasting the suggested MSABA with existing models, we can summarize the system’s efficacy. Findings like accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 measures show that the suggested MSABA-based prediction system outperforms competing approaches. The suggested method demonstrates that the MSABA achieves the highest rate of accuracy compared to the existing classifiers for the largest possible amount of data.

1. Introduction

In the modern era, sensors may enhance the world through the development of the healthcare system. A new mechanism in universal healthcare is known as wireless body area networks, which allow sensors to be injected or worn on the body to gather and transmit actual patient health data, including hypertension, pulse rate, and respiration [1]. The value of human life can be further enhanced by using wearable or flexible electronics for a variety of purposes, such as motion tracking, regeneration, communication modules, illness diagnostics, etc. Among these, several wearable sensors are carried on the person or connected directly to the skin to collect sensory data and show promising results in identifying diverse body behaviors. Typically, smooth data interchange for human motion recognition combined with wearable sensors will support healthcare monitoring applications [2,3,4]. Diseases that interfere with the human heart’s ability to function are referred to as heart diseases. It covers flaws in the heart’s anatomy, irregular heartbeat or rhythm, and diseases of the bloodstream arteries connected to the heart. Cardiologists frequently use an electrocardiogram (ECG) sensor to promptly and noninvasively evaluate for indicators of probable heart illness and irregular cardiac rhythm. The World Health Organization (WHO) [5] estimates that 18 million individuals globally die from heart disease every year. To prevent unexpected mortality from a heart attack or cardiac arrest, early identification and treatment of heart disease are crucial.
Figure 1 depicts the causes of heart disease: cardiovascular arrests, coronary artery disease (CAD), vascular disease, circulatory diseases, etc. To prevent tragic deaths and preserve the average lifespan, a condition must be diagnosed [6]. The Internet of Things (IoT), computer networking, and 5G are examples of automated networks that are used in healthcare. Applying emerging technology to behavioral systems and protective policies can help in the advanced identification of potential health issues and enable the timing of pertinent actions, such as tracking treatments and creating new assessments. It is made up of a dynamic setting with many different aspects, including decision-making, administration of the healthcare system, illness diagnosis and prevention, analysis, and rating. Recently, Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) technology has been used in healthcare systems to gather sensor data for the evaluation and prognosis of cardiac disease. Cardiac illness weakens the body, because it impairs blood flow in the body and leads to artery infections, especially in adults and the elderly. An IoT approach uses the end-to-end detection of cardiac conditions using a single-channel ECG. A digitized stethoscope may be used to monitor patients’ heart sounds instantaneously and identify any problems. By improving these advanced techniques in the healthcare system, we proposed an IoT platform that offers more accurate evaluations of cardiac illness using the Modified Self-Adaptive Bayesian algorithm (MSABA).
Figure 1. Causes of heart diseases.
Our heart disease prediction project’s objective is to determine whether a patient should receive a heart disease diagnosis or not, which is a binary result, so: positive result = 1, the patient will receive a heart disease diagnosis. If the test yields a negative result of 0, the patient will not have heart disease. The “smart heart disease prediction system” developed collects patient data from the IoT or smart gadgets. These items, which are placed on a patient’s body and include activity sensors, medical sensors, and environmental sensors, are also referred to as hardware components.
The main contribution of this study includes an IoT platform that uses a Modified Self-Adaptive Bayesian algorithm (MSABA) to provide more precise assessments of heart disease. An ECG monitors the heart’s electrical signals to detect various cardiac problems. This is the most effective method for constantly monitoring and forecasting patient ECG signals and accomplished with a predictive performance that was sufficient.
The remainder of this article is addressed as follows. In Section 2, the related works and problem statement are provided. The proposed methodology is offered in Section 3. Section 4 contains the results and discussion. Section 5 contains the conclusion.

3. Proposed Methodology

Healthcare is important to preserve and recover one’s physiological, intellectual, including spiritual dimensions, particularly involving qualified and certified individuals. Sensors are employed to track pulses from the ECG, sugar levels and blood lipids, heat, hypertension, pulse rate, and other cardiac parameters to focus attention on the health of cardiac patients.
The measurements help track the general health of heart patients. The use of sensors in healthcare was the main topic of this study. Sensors are used in medical equipment applications to convert various inputs into electric impulses. To deliver more accurate assessments of cardiac illness, we presented the IoT-based Modified Self-Adaptive Bayesian algorithm (MSABA). Figure 2 depicts the flow of the proposed work.
Figure 2. The flow of the proposed work.

3.1. Data Collection

The “Heart Disease Dataset” from the UCI Machine Learning Repository was the dataset utilized in the study. It featured 74 distinct features and the label coronary angiography (NUM). NUM indicated the presence or absence of cardiac problems in a patient. The original dataset values 1, 2, 3, and 4 were combined to represent the presence of heart disease. Patients participated in the examination by providing history information, and practitioners physically examined them. Cleveland, Hungarian, and a combination of the two dubbed CH were the datasets used for the analysis (Cleveland17 Hungarian). The distribution of the data is shown in Table 1. Age, Sex, CP, and TRESTBPS were the clinical variables deemed pertinent, along with the routine test data CHOL, FBS, and RESTECG; exercise electrocardiography with the features THALACH, EXANG, SLOPE, and OLDPEAK; and the noninvasive tests THAL and CA. The label also included NUM. This collection of 13 traits is referred to as “Subset A” for comparison. Cleveland had a more consistent proportion of both healthy people and heart disease patients than Hungarian and 18 CH [47].
Table 1. Datasets distribution.

3.2. Data Preprocessing Using Normalization

Preprocessing refers to a series of operations carried out on data to alter the data’s source. These actions include adding any missing details, altering the type of object, and taking various procedures. Therefore, we transformed the data using max–min normalization, employed K-nearest neighbor for missing values, and Z-Score normalization for extreme values.

3.2.1. K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN)

KNN is one of the simplest algorithms. It primarily serves as a categorizing tool. The categorization is dependent on the neighbor’s input values. The K-nearest neighbor (KNN) equation was used to find the missing values function during the preprocessing stage. Equation (1) is used to find the missing values of the records
R a n g e ( A , B ) = j = 1 m ( A j B j ) 2
where A j   and   B j are a few noted values and expected values.

3.2.2. Max–Min Normalization

One of the most frequently used techniques for normalizing data is min–max normalization. Min–max normalization is used for data transformation. Based on the minimum and maximum values, it changes each quantitative feature’s result into a target value. Data normalization is aided by min–max normalization. The data will be scaled between 0 and 1. We can more easily interpret the data thanks to this standardization. Data transformation is detected by using Equation (2)
D t = ( Y   Y m i n )   ( Y m a x   Y m i n )
where Y is a collection of the predicted values that are denoted in the dataset. The minimum and maximum values in Y are denoted by Y m i n and Y m a x .

3.3. Classification Using Modified Self-Adaptive Bayesian Algorithm (MSABA)

Trials of early acute heart failure syndromes (AHFS) using modified self-adaptive Bayesian algorithm designs offer a chance to tailor treatment within the confines of clinical research. The use of a modified self-adaptive Bayesian algorithm (MSABA) design allows researchers to examine a variety of therapeutic modalities in a variety of patient phenotypes within a single trial while still maintaining a manageable sample size. This approach is particularly well-suited for researching complex, heterogeneous conditions such as acute heart failure syndromes (AHFS). A novel and potentially paradigm-shifting approach to researching individual therapy options for acute heart failure syndromes is a modified self-adaptive Bayesian algorithm in an acute heart failure syndrome clinical trial.
If one treatment arm in a Bayesian adaptive trial is underperforming for a specific patient profile, the arm could be down-selected or terminated very early to allow for patients with the same profile to be assigned to a different treatment arm. A more promising early study in acute heart failure syndromes patients could be conducted by combining a modified self-adaptive Bayesian adaptive algorithm trial design method with trial enrolment in the ED (during acute symptoms).
MSABA is defined as a group of procedures that are all based on the idea that every combination of attributes being categorized is unrelated to the others. For many purposes, including defect detection and knowledge discovery in biomedicine, Bayesian algorithms have shown to be one of the best effective intelligence techniques. It has a strong tradition in medicine, particularly because of its potential to grasp and make sense of ambiguity. Antihypertensive, respiratory distress and other aberrant blood pressure-related heart disease are frequent and significant. Based on pertinent diagnosing information, the first-order premise logical formulations for detecting this heart disease may be established. A model of such a specified formula may be seen in Equation (3) that follows.
a . ( ( S B P x ( a ) S B P y ( a ) ( D B P x ( a ) Ʌ   D B P y ( a ) ) C H T ( a ) )
where ‘a’ denotes the patient having heart disease. Diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) are indications of heart disease. The concept of critical hypertension (CHT) is well-known. Suffix x, y stands for the level of the particular condition for each patient. Equations (4)–(11) defines the additional first-order premise logical formulations for identifying heart disease associated with unusual hypertension.
a . ( S B P y ( a ) D B P d ( a ) A A P x ( a ) S H B P ( a ) )
a . ( S B P y ( a ) D B P d ( a ) D A P x ( a ) D H B P ( a ) )
a . ( S B P p ( a ) D A P y ( a ) A A P y ( a ) D B P d ( a ) H B P ( a ) )
a . ( B Q x ( a ) H i g h _ B Q ( a ) )
a . ( B Q y ( a ) L o w _ B Q ( a ) )
a . ( A A P p ( a ) S B P d ( a ) L _ B l o o d _ Q u a ( a ) H T ( a ) )
a . ( P R x ( a ) L _ B l o o d _ Q u a ( a ) L o w _ P R ( a ) )
a . ( P R y ( a ) H _ B l o o d _ Q u a ( a ) H i g h _ P R ( a ) )
AAP represents the average arterial pressure, SHBP denotes systolic high blood pressure, DHBP is diastolic high blood pressure, HBP represents High blood pressure, BQ stands for blood quantity, PR stands for pulse rate, HPT denotes hypotension, Min PR represents the minimum pulse rate, and Max PR indicates the maximum pulse rate.
MSABA is used in applications where there is a requirement for a clear comprehension of uncertain data or when there is a lot of diverse or noisy data. Consequently, we suggested this approach for heart disease patients to identify their symptoms, circumstances, and pulse rate. According to the input symptoms’ values in the example, it automatically directs the probability inference to take a specific inference route and, as a result, determines that the patient has a favorable case of HT. The precise inference route is indicated in bold for reference. Therefore, based on the values of the input symptoms, the created MSABA may intelligently follow the proper inference route to automatically judge the diagnostic output. Algorithm 1 represents the pseudocode of MSABA, and Figure 3 indicates the flow of the Bayesian algorithm.
Algorithm1 Pseudocode of MSABA
1:      t: = 0
2:      generate initial population P (0)
3:      While not done do
4:      select population of promising solutions S(t)
5:        build Modified Self Adaptive Bayesian Algorithm B(t) for S(t)
6:        sample B(t) to generate O(t)
7:        incorporate O(t) into P(t)
8:        t: = t + I
9:      end while
Figure 3. Flow of the Bayesian algorithm.

4. Performance Evaluation

In this section, we evaluate the efficacy of our suggested approach using the performance indicator indicated before. Our proposed technique is performed and also matched with other standard techniques (MANAGE-HF [50], GA [51], ML [52], BSNs [17], MSABA). Heart failure patients experience a range of physical and psychological symptoms, including dyspnea, fatigue, edema, trouble sleeping, sadness, and chest discomfort. Patients’ everyday social and physical activities are limited by these symptoms, which lowers their quality of life. High hospitalization and mortality rates are associated with low QOL. The limitation of genetic algorithms (GA) includes identifying the fitness function as a challenge. Definition of the problem’s representation. It is a case of premature convergence. Defining the values to use for things such as population size, mutation rate, crossover rate, selection method, strength, and so on can be difficult. Problem-specific knowledge cannot be easily included. Training datasets for machine learning systems need to be large, diverse, and accurate. In other cases, they may even have to hold off until fresh information is generated. Machine learning requires a significant length of time for the algorithms to learn and mature so that they can accomplish their goal with a high degree of accuracy and relevance. Likewise, it requires a lot of energy and money to run. Since there is no data protection system in place, there are concerns regarding the privacy and security of patient monitoring data. Standards of BAN implementation are nonexistent. These are the limitations of the existing methods. Therefore, we can use the proposed method of the modified self-adaptive Bayesian algorithm to overcome these issues.
Figure 4 depicts the comparison of accuracy with proposed and existing techniques regarding the given financial collections. In this graph, the x-axis denotes financial datasets, and the y-axis denotes accuracy. In Figure 4, the existing methods of management of heart failure have 56%, the genetic algorithm has 64%, machine learning have 70%, body sensor networks have 82%, and the proposed method of modified, self-adaptive Bayesian algorithm have 90%, so the proposed technique has a high degree of accuracy when compared to other methods.
Figure 4. [17,50,51,52] Comparisons of the accuracy.
Figure 5 represented the comparison of recall with the proposed and existing techniques regarding the given financial collections. In Figure 5, the existing methods of management of heart failure have 60%, the genetic algorithm have 66%, machine learning have 73%, body sensor networks have 85%, and the proposed method of the modified self-adaptive Bayesian algorithm have 91%, so the proposed technique has a high degree of recall when compared to other methods.
Figure 5. [17,50,51,52] Comparison of recall.
The comparison of precision with proposed and existing techniques is represented in Figure 6. In Figure 6, the existing methods of management of heart failure have 58%, the genetic algorithm have 65%, machine learning have 72%, body sensor networks have 84%, and the proposed method of modified self-adaptive Bayesian algorithm have 92%, so the existing methods have a low degree of precision when compared to the proposed method.
Figure 6. [17,50,51,52] Comparison of precision.
Figure 7 depicts the comparison of the F1 measure with proposed and existing techniques regarding the given financial collections. In this graph, the x-axis denotes financial datasets, and the y-axis denotes accuracy. In Figure 7 the existing methods of management of heart failure have 63%, the genetic algorithm have 70%, machine learning have 79%, body sensor networks have 88% and the proposed method of modified self-adaptive Bayesian algorithm have 95%, so the proposed method has a high degree of F1-measures when compared to other existing methods.
Figure 7. [17,50,51,52] Comparison of the f1 measures.
Figure 8 depicts the comparison of specificity with proposed and existing techniques regarding the given financial collections. In this graph, the x-axis denotes financial datasets, and the y-axis denotes specificity. In Figure 8, the existing methods of management of heart failure have 55%, the genetic algorithm have 62%, machine learning have 70%, body sensor networks have 88%, and the proposed method of modified self-adaptive Bayesian algorithm have 95%, so the proposed method has a high degree of specificity when compared to other existing methods.
Figure 8. [17,50,51,52] Comparison of the specificity.
Figure 9 represents the comparison of root mean square error with proposed and existing techniques regarding the given financial collections. In this graph, the x-axis denotes financial datasets, and the y-axis denotes the root mean square error. In Figure 9, the existing methods of management of heart failure have 96%, genetic algorithm have 87%, machine learning have 71%, body sensor networks have 63%, and the proposed method of modified self-adaptive Bayesian algorithm have 56%, so the proposed method has a low degree of root mean square error when compared to other existing methods.
Figure 9. [17,50,51,52] Comparison of the root mean square error.
Future research will use data mining techniques to create a more precise dataset for heart disease diagnostics, improving the performance of feature fusion. Additionally, unique feature reduction techniques will be developed to manage massive feature counts and volumes of medical records. To attain effective results, a more advanced strategy will be investigated for eliminating unimportant characteristics and controlling missing data and noise.
The reliability of the registries and the linking determine the validity. As a result, we checked the predicted incidence rates of coronary heart disease (CHD), acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina pectoris, and heart failure against the cardiovascular registry Maastricht cohort study’s disease registry. The cohort comprises 21,148 people who were randomly selected from Maastricht and its neighboring districts between 1987 and 1997 and were born between 1927 and 1977.
In this study, a modified self-adaptive Bayesian algorithm (MSABA) is suggested to offer more accurate evaluations of heart disease. In this section, the patient’s health status, heart rate, and course of therapy are analyzed. The important metrics are accuracy, recall, precision, and F1 measure. The suggested algorithm’s efficacy is evaluated using these metrics. The outcomes were compared to those obtained using conventional methods such as Multiple Cardiac Sensors for the management of heart failure (MANAGE-HF) [50], genetic algorithms (GA) [51], machine learning approaches (ML) [52], and body sensor networks (BSNs) [17]. As per data collection, the datasets are gathered out of public health datasets. The Jupiter notebook simulation tool system is used in this work. Jupiter notebook is a convenient tool for python programming projects and is used as a simulation tool. The Jupytor notebook includes code, as well as rich text features, including equations, links, and many other types of data. These documents are the ideal place to combine an analysis description and its results, since they include rich text elements with code, and they also enable real-time data analysis. A web-based interactive tool for creating images, maps, charts, visualizations, and narrative prose is called Jupyter notebook.
In the management of the heart failure (MANAGE-HF) existing method, the heart logic index datasets are used. Cleveland heart disease datasets are used in the genetic algorithms existing method. Heart rate data is implemented using machine learning (ML) approaches. Data are collected using wearable sensors fitted onto the human body in the body sensor networks existing method.

4.1. Accuracy

The proximity among measurements and their “real” values are referred to as accuracy. A measurement’s accuracy decreases with distance from the expected or true value. The degree to which evaluation results of a proportion are much closer to the actual value of that number indicates more accuracy of the device. The accuracy of the suggested approach and existing approaches are displayed in Figure 4. The proposed approach is demonstrated to be more accurate when contrasted with the existing method. The accuracy of the proposed algorithm and the existing systems’ estimations of heart disease are highlighted. While MANAGE-HF has a 56% accuracy rate, GA has a 64% accuracy rate, ML has a 70% accuracy rate, and BSNs have an 82% accuracy rate, the suggested method (MSABA) has a 90% accuracy rate. It demonstrates that the suggested strategy is more successful than the existing approaches.

4.2. Recall

The capacity of a model to locate all pertinent instances in a data source. Recall is calculated mathematically as the product of the number of true positives divided by a sum of the true positives and false negatives. The percentage of pertinent instances that were found constitutes a recall. The true positive rate sometimes referred to as sensitivity is also referred to as recall. Figure 5 illustrates how the current and suggested methods are remembered. When compared to the commonly employed methods, the proposed procedure had the highest recall for identifying heart disease. The recall of the recommended algorithm and the estimates of heart disease made by the existing systems are established. In comparison to MANAG-memory HF rates of 60% from GA, 66% from ML, and 85% from BSNs, the suggested technique MSABA has a 91% recall rate. It illustrates that the proposed methodology is more effective than the traditionally used methods.

4.3. Precision

A classification model’s capacity to isolate only the pertinent data points, precision is calculated by dividing the total number of true positives by the total number of true positives + false positives. Precision, or the positive predictive value, is the percentage of pertinent ideas among the recovered occurrences. It may indicate that the standard for quality is precise. Precision is the probability of pertaining recovery on average. The precision of suggested and existing methodologies is compared in Figure 6. In comparison to the existing approaches, the suggested study has substantially higher precision in the healthcare monitoring system of heart disease. The precision of the existing systems is as follows: MANAG- HF has a 58% precision level, GA has a 65% precision level, ML has a 72% level, and BSNs have an 84% level. The suggested system MSABA has a 92% precision level. As a result, the suggested system has the highest level of functionality

4.4. F1-Measure

The accuracy of a model on a dataset is gauged by the F-score, also known as the F1-score. It’s employed to assess binary categorization schemes that label examples as “positive” or “negative”. By calculating the harmonic means, the clarity and memory of a system are merged into a single statistic known as the F1 measure. Figure 7 demonstrates the F1 measure for both existing and newly proposed methodologies. Improved system performance is indicated by a higher F1 metric for the prediction of heart disease. According to Figure 6, the suggested system achieves 95% of the F1 measure, compared to MANAGE-HF 63%, GA 70%, ML 79%, and BSNs 88%. It indicates that the suggested system is more valuable.
The accuracy of a test at identifying people who do not have a condition or feature is known as specificity. It is the percentage of people who are accurately diagnosed as actually not at risk or without a condition (such as a trait, disease, categorization, or label) by a diagnostic tool. Figure 8 demonstrates the specificity of both existing and new proposed methodologies. According to Figure 8, the suggested system of MSABA achieves 95% specificity, compared to MANAGE-HF 55%, GA 62%, ML 70%, and BSNs 88%. It indicates that the suggested system is more valuable than the existing approaches.
The square root of the mean of the square of all the errors is known as the root mean squared error (RMSE). The RMSE is frequently employed and is regarded as a superior all-purpose error metric for numerical forecasts. The precision of the suggested and existing methodologies is compared in Figure 9. In comparison to existing approaches, the suggested study has a substantially lower root mean square error in the healthcare monitoring system of heart disease. The root mean square error of the existing systems is as follows: MANAG- HF has a 96% root mean square level, GA has an 87% root mean square level, ML has a 71% level, and BSNs have a 63% level. The suggested system MSABA has a 56% precision level. As a result, the suggested system has the lowest level of functionality.

5. Discussion

Heart disease risk can be influenced by genetics in a variety of ways. Every component of the cardiovascular system, including the blood vessel strength and communication between heart cells, is governed by genes. Heart disease risk can be impacted by a single gene mutation or genetic variant. The heart is the most significant organ in the human body due to its crucial function in blood pumping. Machine learning can play a critical role in reducing the mortality rate from heart illnesses by forecasting heart health and predicting disease. Along with testing HeartLogic alerts, MANAGE-HF also featured an AMG that outlines step-by-step procedures for increasing the dosage of diuretics, enhancing guideline-directed medical therapy, and treating underlying reasons. BSNs can sense, communicate, and interpret a variety of physiological information, enabling doctors to make crucial clinical judgments. Thanks to its small size and biocompatibility, BSNs can be implanted or placed on the body of the patient with the least amount of disruption to their daily lives. We suggest MSABA approaches to solve this problem.

6. Conclusions

IoT healthcare technologies, wearable technologies, and data access enables doctors to monitor patients more precisely and administer more informed therapy. IoT security technologies improve employee, patient, and clinician security. In this paper, we proposed an IoT-based Modified Self-Adaptive Bayesian algorithm (MSABA) for the prediction of heart disease by the healthcare monitoring system. This system continually monitors the patient’s vital signs, including their blood pressure and heart rate, as well as pertinent environmental data, and it balances the demands on computational and communication resources with the demands for healthcare services. As a result, the suggested algorithm is successful for implementing in predicting heart disease. For the prediction of heart disease to be further enhanced, classification technology needs to be improved. Further advanced technology will probably be introduced to this platform, extending its functionality for deployment in the future.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.N.; Formal analysis, T.R.; Funding acquisition, A.F.S. and Y.A.; Methodology, R.N. and T.R.; Project administration, A.F.S., O.I.K. and Y.A.; Software, N.M.; Supervision, A.F.S., O.I.K., Y.A., R.N., N.M. and T.R.; Validation, R.N.; Writing—original draft, R.N.; and Writing—review and editing, A.F.S., Y.A. and R.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research is funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research at Umm Al-Qura University, Saudi Arabia, Grant Code: 22UQU4281755DSR02.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Deanship of Scientific Research at Umm Al-Qura University for supporting this work by Grant Code: (22UQU4281755DSR02).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Xu, R.; Ren, Q. Cryptoanalysis on a Cloud-Centric Internet-of-Medical-Things-Enabled Smart Healthcare System. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 23618–23624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Zhang, Q.; Jin, T.; Cai, J.; Xu, L.; He, T.; Wang, T.; Tian, Y.; Li, L.; Peng, Y.; Lee, C. Wearable Triboelectric Sensors Enabled Gait Analysis and Waist Motion Capture for IoT-Based Smart Healthcare Applications. Adv. Sci. 2022, 9, 2103694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Subahi, A.F. A model transformation approach for detecting distancing violations in weighted graphs. Comput. Syst. Sci. Eng. 2021, 36, 13–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Subahi, A.F. Edge-Based IoT Medical Record System: Requirements, Recommendations and Conceptual Design. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 94150–94159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Husain, K.; Mohd Zahid, M.S.; Ul Hassan, S.; Hasbullah, S.; Mandala, S. Advances of ECG sensors from hardware, software, and format interoperability perspectives. Electronics 2021, 10, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sukhavasi, S.B.; Sukhavasi, S.B.; Elleithy, K.; Abuzneid, S.; Elleithy, A. Human Body-Related Disease Diagnosis Systems Using CMOS Image Sensors: A Systematic Review. Sensors 2021, 21, 2098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sharma, B.; Hashmi, A.; Gupta, C.; Khalaf, O.I.; Abdulsahib, G.M.; Itani, M.M. Hybrid Sparrow Clustered (HSC) Algorithm for Top-N Recommendation System. Symmetry 2022, 14, 793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sonawane, R.; Patil, H.D. Prediction of Heart Disease by Optimized Distance and Density-Based Clustering. In Proceedings of the 2022 Second International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Smart Energy (ICAIS), Coimbatore, India, 23–25 February 2022; pp. 1001–1008. [Google Scholar]
  9. Raju, K.B.; Dara, S.; Vidyarthi, A.; Gupta, V.M.; Khan, B. Smart Heart Disease Prediction System with IoT and Fog Computing Sectors Enabled by Cascaded Deep Learning Model. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2022, 2022, 1070697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Nancy, A.A.; Ravindran, D.; Raj Vincent, P.D.; Srinivasan, K.; Gutierrez Reina, D. IoT-Cloud-Based Smart Healthcare Monitoring System for Heart Disease Prediction via Deep Learning. Electronics 2022, 11, 2292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Absar, N.; Das, E.K.; Shoma, S.N.; Khandaker, M.U.; Miraz, M.H.; Faruque, M.R.I.; Tamam, N.; Sulieman, A.; Pathan, R.K. June. The efficacy of machine-learning-supported smart system for heart disease prediction. Healthcare 2022, 10, 1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Amer, S.S.; Wander, G.; Singh, M.; Bahsoon, R.; Jennings, N.R.; Gill, S.S. BioLearner: A Machine Learning-Powered Smart Heart Disease Risk Prediction System Utilizing Biomedical Markers. J. Interconnect. Netw. 2022, 22, 2145003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Alotaibi, Y.; Subahi, A.F. New goal-oriented requirements extraction framework for e-health services: A case study of diagnostic testing during the COVID-19 outbreak. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Sheeba, A.; Padmakala, S.; Subasini, C.A.; Karuppiah, S.P. MKELM: Mixed Kernel Extreme Learning Machine using BMDA optimization for web services based heart disease prediction in smart healthcare. Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 2022, 25, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Tasnim, F.; Habiba, S.U. A comparative study on heart disease prediction using data mining techniques and feature selection. In Proceedings of the 2021 2nd International Conference on Robotics, Electrical and Signal Processing Techniques (ICREST), Dhaka, Bangladesh, 5–7 January 2021; pp. 338–341. [Google Scholar]
  16. Deepika, D.; Balaji, N. Effective heart disease prediction using novel MLP-EBMDA approach. Biomed. Signal Process. Control 2022, 72, 103318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Shakya, S.; Joby, P.P. Heart disease prediction using fog computing based wireless body sensor networks (WSNs). IRO J. Sustain. Wirel. Syst. 2021, 3, 49–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hasanova, H.; Tufail, M.; Baek, U.J.; Park, J.T.; Kim, M.S. A novel blockchain-enabled heart disease prediction mechanism using machine learning. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2022, 101, 108086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kavitha, C.; Mani, V.; Srividhya, S.R.; Khalaf, O.I.; Tavera Romero, C.A. Early-Stage Alzheimer’s Disease Prediction Using Machine Learning Models. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 853294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Mishra, J.; Tiwari, M.; Singh, S.T.; Goswami, S. Detection of heart disease employing Recurrent CONVoluted neural networks (Rec-CONVnet) for effectual classification process in smart medical application. In Proceedings of the 2021 4th International Conference on Recent Trends in Computer Science and Technology (ICRTCST), Jamshedpur, India, 11–12 February 2022; pp. 389–394. [Google Scholar]
  21. Awati, J.S.; Patil, S.S.; Kumbhar, M.S. Smart Heart Disease Detection using Particle Swarm Optimization and Support Vector Machine. Int. J. Electr. Electron. Res. 2021, 9, 120–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Rao, J.N.; Prasad, D.R.S. An Ensemble Deep Dynamic Algorithm (EDDA) to Predict the Heart Disease. Int. J. Sci. Res. Sci. Eng. Technol. (IJSRSET) 2021, 8, 105–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Yewale, D.; Vijayragavan, S.P. Comprehensive review on machine learning approach for heart disease prediction: Current status and future prospects. AIP Conf. Proc. 2022, 2463, 020043. [Google Scholar]
  24. Patil, R.S.; Gangwar, M. Heart Disease Prediction Using Machine Learning and Data Analytics Approach. In Proceedings of International Conference on Communication and Artificial Intelligence; Springer: Singapore, 2022; pp. 351–361. [Google Scholar]
  25. Asghar, J.; Tabasam, M.; Althobaiti, M.M.; Adnan Ashour, A.; Aleid, M.A.; Ibrahim Khalaf, O.; Aldhyani, T.H.H. A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Two Treatment Strategies, Evaluating the Meaningfulness of HAM-D Rating Scale in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder. Front. Psychiatry 2022, 13, 873693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Boukhatem, C.; Youssef, H.Y.; Nassif, A.B. Heart Disease Prediction Using Machine Learning. In Proceedings of the 2022 Advances in Science and Engineering Technology International Conferences (ASET), Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 21–24 February 2022; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  27. Manimurugan, S.; Almutairi, S.; Aborokbah, M.M.; Narmatha, C.; Ganesan, S.; Chilamkurti, N.; Alzaheb, R.A.; Almoamari, H. Two-Stage Classification Model for the Prediction of Heart Disease Using IoMT and Artificial Intelligence. Sensors 2022, 22, 476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Chitra, S.; Jayalakshmi, V. Heart Disease and Chronic Kidney Disease Prediction based on Internet of Things using FRNN Algorithm. In Proceedings of the 2022 6th International Conference on Computing Methodologies and Communication (ICCMC), Erode, India, 29–31 March 2022; pp. 1690–1695. [Google Scholar]
  29. Jansi Rani, S.V.; Chandran, K.R.; Ranganathan, A.; Chandrasekharan, M.; Janani, B.; Deepsheka, G. Smart wearable model for predicting heart disease using machine learning. J. Ambient Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2022, 13, 4321–4332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Deepika, D.; Balaji, N. Effective heart disease prediction with Grey-wolf with Firefly algorithm-differential evolution (GF-DE) for feature selection and weighted ANN classification. Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 2022, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Mohan, S.; Thirumalai, C.; Srivastava, G. Effective heart disease prediction using hybrid machine learning techniques. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 81542–81554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Fitriyani, N.L.; Syafrudin, M.; Alfian, G.; Rhee, J. HDPM: An effective heart disease prediction model for a clinical decision support system. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 133034–133050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Shah, D.; Patel, S.; Bharti, S.K. Heart disease prediction using machine learning techniques. SN Comput. Sci. 2020, 1, 345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ali, M.M.; Paul, B.K.; Ahmed, K.; Bui, F.M.; Quinn, J.M.; Moni, M.A. Heart disease prediction using supervised machine learning algorithms: Performance analysis and comparison. Comput. Biol. Med. 2021, 136, 104672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Singh, A.; Kumar, R. Heart disease prediction using machine learning algorithms. In Proceedings of the 2020 international conference on electrical and electronics engineering (ICE3), Gorakhpur, India, 14–15 February 2020; pp. 452–457. [Google Scholar]
  36. Ganesan, M.; Sivakumar, N. IoT based heart disease prediction and diagnosis model for healthcare using machine learning models. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on System, Computation, Automation and Networking (ICSCAN), Pondicherry, India, 29–30 March 2019; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  37. Ahamed, J.; Koli, A.M.; Ahmad, K.; Jamal, M.; Gupta, B.B. CDPS-IoT: Cardiovascular Disease Prediction System Based on IoT Using Machine Learning. Int. J. Interact. Multimed. Artif. Intell. 2022, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Shaikh, Y.; Parvati, V.; Biradar, S.R. Ensemble learning algorithm based heart disease prediction using internet of things implementation. Harbin GongyeDaxueXuebao/J. Harbin Inst. Technol. 2022, 54, 46–57. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ali, F.; El-Sappagh, S.; Islam, S.R.; Kwak, D.; Ali, A.; Imran, M.; Kwak, K.S. A smart healthcare monitoring system for heart disease prediction based on ensemble deep learning and feature fusion. Inf. Fusion 2020, 63, 208–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ajabe, M.D.; Mahamuni, M.N.; Lande, M.S.; Kazi, M.R. Heart Monitoring and Heart disease Prediction System: Survey. Int. J. 2020, 5. Available online: http://ijasret.com/VolumeArticles/FullTextPDF/396_6.HEART_MONITORING_AND_HEART_DISEASE_PREDICTION.pdf (accessed on 25 August 2022).
  41. Rajendran, S.; Khalaf, O.I.; Alotaibi, Y.; Alghamdi, S. MapReduce-based big data classification model using feature subset selection and hyperparameter tuned deep belief network. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 24138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Yazdani, A.; Varathan, K.D.; Chiam, Y.K.; Malik, A.W.; Wan Ahmad, W.A. A novel approach for heart disease prediction using strength scores with significant predictors. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2021, 21, 194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Goel, S.; Deep, A.; Srivastava, S.; Tripathi, A. Comparative analysis of various techniques for heart disease prediction. In Proceedings of the 2019 4th International Conference on Information Systems and Computer Networks (ISCON), Mathura, India, 21–22 November 2019; pp. 88–94. [Google Scholar]
  44. Anand, S. Archimedes optimization algorithm: Heart disease prediction: Archimedes optimization algorithm: Heart disease prediction. Multimedia Res. 2021, 4. Available online: https://publisher.resbee.org/admin/index.php/mr/article/view/45 (accessed on 25 August 2022).
  45. Nandy, S.; Adhikari, M.; Balasubramanian, V.; Menon, V.G.; Li, X.; Zakarya, M. An intelligent heart disease prediction system based on swarm-artificial neural network. Neural Comput. Appl. 2021, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Nawaz, M.S.; Shoaib, B.; Ashraf, M.A. Intelligent Cardiovascular Disease Prediction Empowered with Gradient Descent Optimization. Heliyon 2021, 7, e06948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gárate-Escamila, A.K.; El Hassani, A.H.; Andrès, E. Classification models for heart disease prediction using feature selection and PCA. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2020, 19, 100330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Bansal, H.; Khan, R. A review paper on human-computer interaction. Int. J. Adv. Res. Comput. Sci. Softw. Eng. 2018, 8, 53–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Bharti, R.; Khamparia, A.; Shabaz, M.; Dhiman, G.; Pande, S.; Singh, P. Prediction of heart disease using a combination of machine learning and deep learning. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2021, 2021, 8387680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Hernandez, A.F.; Albert, N.M.; Allen, L.A.; Ahmed, R.; Averina, V.; Boehmer, J.P.; Cowie, M.R.; Chien, C.V.; Galvao, M.; Klein, L.; et al. Multiple cArdiac seNsors for mAnaGEment of Heart Failure (MANAGE-HF)–Phase I Evaluation of the Integration and Safety of the HeartLogic Multisensor Algorithm in Patients With Heart Failure. J. Card. Fail. 2022, 28, 1245–1254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Eisa, M.M.; Alnaggar, M.H. Hybrid Rough-Genetic Classification Model for IoT Heart Disease Monitoring System. In Digital Transformation Technology; Springer: Singapore, 2022; pp. 437–451. [Google Scholar]
  52. Ko, Y.F.; Kuo, P.H.; Wang, C.F.; Chen, Y.J.; Chuang, P.C.; Li, S.Z.; Chen, B.W.; Yang, F.C.; Lo, Y.C.; Yang, Y.; et al. Quantification Analysis of Sleep Based on Smartwatch Sensors for Parkinson’s Disease. Biosensors 2022, 12, 74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.