ArticleJMIR medical informatics2022
Automatically Explaining Machine Learning Predictions on Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations: Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Using Xiaoqinglong Decoction to Treat Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Presenting External Cold and Internal Fluid Retention Syndrome: Observation of the Clinical Efficacy].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025Trial
- Development and internal validation of an interpretable machine learning model for predicting dialysis risk in patients with stage 3-4 chronic kidney disease.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Exacerbations of COPD.Respiratory care · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of death and places a heavy burden on health care. To optimize the allocation of precious preventive care management resources and improve the outcomes for high-risk patients with COPD, we recently built the most accurate model to date to predict severe COPD exacerbations, which need inpatient stays or emergency department visits, in the following 12 months. Our model is a machine learning model. As is the case with most machine learning models, our model does not explain its predictions, forming a barrier for clinical use. Previously, we designed a method to automatically provide rule-type explanations for machine learning predictions and suggest tailored interventions with no loss of model performance. This method has been tested before for asthma outcome prediction but not for COPD outcome prediction.
objectiveThis study aims to assess the generalizability of our automatic explanation method for predicting severe COPD exacerbations.
methodsThe patient cohort included all patients with COPD who visited the University of Washington Medicine facilities between 2011 and 2019. In a secondary analysis of 43,576 data instances, we used our formerly developed automatic explanation method to automatically explain our model's predictions and suggest tailored interventions.
resultsOur method explained the predictions for 97.1% (100/103) of the patients with COPD whom our model correctly predicted to have severe COPD exacerbations in the following 12 months and the predictions for 73.6% (134/182) of the patients with COPD who had ≥1 severe COPD exacerbation in the following 12 months.
conclusionsOur automatic explanation method worked well for predicting severe COPD exacerbations. After further improving our method, we hope to use it to facilitate future clinical use of our model. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/13783.
Indexed as
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.