Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33141161›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2020

Development, Validation, and Evaluation of a Simple Machine Learning Model to Predict Cirrhosis Mortality.

Fasiha Kanwal, Thomas J Taylor, Jennifer R Kramer, Yumei Cao, Donna Smith, Allen L Gifford, Hashem B El-Serag, Aanand D Naik, Steven M Asch

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. [Construction of a machine learning prognostic prediction model based on psoas muscle index for patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2025
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Fasiha KanwalSection of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Thomas J TaylorCenter for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California.
Jennifer R KramerHealth Services Research, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Yumei CaoVeterans Affairs (VA) Health Services Research and Development Service Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety, Houston, Texas.
Donna SmithVeterans Affairs (VA) Health Services Research and Development Service Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety, Houston, Texas.
Allen L GiffordDepartment of Medicine, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Hashem B El-SeragSection of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Aanand D NaikHealth Services Research, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Steven M AschVeterans Affairs (VA) Health Services Research and Development Service Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety, Houston, Texas.

Funding

Patient centered care for individuals with advanced liver diseaseI01HX002204 · VA · MICHAEL E DEBAKEY VA MEDICAL CENTER · PI KANWAL, FASIHA, NAIK, AANAND D. · 2018 to 2021
–
HSRD VA I01 HX002204
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Machine-learning algorithms offer better predictive accuracy than traditional prognostic models but are too complex and opaque for clinical use. Objective: To compare different machine learning methods in predicting overall mortality in cirrhosis and to use machine learning to select easily scored clinical variables for a novel cirrhosis prognostic model. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study used a retrospective cohort of adult patients with cirrhosis or its complications seen in 130 hospitals and affiliated ambulatory clinics in the integrated, national Veterans Affairs health care system from October 1, 2011, to September 30, 2015. Patients were followed up through December 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from October 1, 2017, to May 31, 2020. Exposures: Potential predictors included demographic characteristics; liver disease etiology, severity, and complications; use of health care resources; comorbid conditions; and comprehensive laboratory and medication data. Patients were randomly selected for model development (66.7%) and validation (33.3%). Three different statistical and machine learning methods were evaluated: gradient descent boosting, logistic regression with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regularization, and logistic regression with LASSO constrained to select no more than 10 predictors (partial pathway model). Predictor inclusion and model performance were evaluated in a 5-fold cross-validation. Last, the predictors identified in the most parsimonious (the partial path) model were refit using maximum-likelihood estimation (Cirrhosis Mortality Model [CiMM]), and its predictive performance was compared with that of the widely used Model for End Stage Liver Disease with sodium (MELD-Na) score. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause mortality. Results: Of the 107 939 patients with cirrhosis (mean [SD] age, 62.7 [9.6] years; 96.6% male; 66.3% white, 18.4% African American), the annual mortality rate ranged from 8.8% to 15.3%. In total, 32.7% of patients died within 3 years, and 46.2% died within 5 years after the index date. Models predicting 1-year mortality had good discrimination for the gradient descent boosting (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve [AUC], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.80-0.82), logistic regression with LASSO regularization (AUC, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.77-0.79), and the partial path logistic model (AUC, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.76-0.78). All models showed good calibration. The final CiMM model with machine learning-derived clinical variables offered significantly better discrimination than the MELD-Na score, with AUCs of 0.78 (95% CI, 0.77-0.79) vs 0.67 (95% CI, 0.66-0.68) for 1-year mortality, respectively (DeLong z = 17.00; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, simple machine learning techniques performed as well as the more advanced ensemble gradient boosting. Using the clinical variables identified from simple machine learning in a cirrhosis mortality model produced a new score more transparent than machine learning and more predictive than the MELD-Na score.

Indexed as

Machine LearningAgedDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansLiver CirrhosisLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesROC CurveTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID33141161
PMCPMC7610191

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.