ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2021
Artificial Intelligence Predicts Cost After Ambulatory Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.
Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Arthrofibrosis After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Biological Mechanisms, Diagnosis, and Treatment: An International Consensus Symposium.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence and its Current Role in Clinical Outcome Prediction, Musculoskeletal Imaging, and Economic and Ethical Considerations within Orthopedics and Sports Medicine.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo develop and internally validate a machine-learning algorithm to reliably predict cost after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).
methodsA retrospective review of the New York State Ambulatory Surgery and Services database was performed to identify patients who underwent elective ACLR from 2015 to 2016. Features included in initial models consisted of patient characteristics (age, sex, insurance status, income, medical comorbidities as classified by the Clinical Classifications Software diagnosis code) as well as intraoperative variables (type of anesthesia and procedure-specific factors). Models were generated to predict total charges using 4 algorithms: random forest, extreme gradient boost, elastic net penalized regression, and support vector machines with radial kernels. Training was performed with 10-fold cross-validation followed by internal validation via 0.632 bootstrapping. Model discriminative performance was assessed by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, calibration, and the Brier score. Decision curve analysis was performed to demonstrate the net benefit of using the final model in practice.
resultsIn total, 7,311 patients undergoing ambulatory ACLR were included. The random forest model demonstrated the best performance assessed via internal validation (area under the curve = 0.85), calibration, and the Brier score (0.208). Cost incurred was influenced by anesthesia type, operating room time, and number of chronic comorbidities. Decision curve analysis revealed a net benefit for use of the random forest model and the model was integrated into a web-based open-access application.
conclusionsThe random forest model predicted cost after ambulatory ACLR using a large, statewide database with good performance. The top variables found to predict increased charges were general anesthesia, operating room time, meniscal repair, self-pay insurance, patient neighborhood characteristics, and number of chronic conditions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective cohort study.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.