Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35407629›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Machine Learning Algorithms: Prediction and Feature Selection for Clinical Refracture after Surgically Treated Fragility Fracture.

Hirokazu Shimizu, Ken Enda, Tomohiro Shimizu, Yusuke Ishida, Hotaka Ishizu, Koki Ise, Shinya Tanaka, Norimasa Iwasaki

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Development and reporting of artificial intelligence in osteoporosis management.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hirokazu ShimizuDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-8638, Japan.
Ken EndaDepartment of Cancer Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-8638, Japan.
Tomohiro ShimizuDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-8638, Japan.
Yusuke IshidaDepartment of Pathology, Hokkaido Medical Center, Sapporo 063-0005, Japan.
Hotaka IshizuDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-8638, Japan.
Koki IseDepartment of Cancer Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-8638, Japan.
Shinya TanakaDepartment of Cancer Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-8638, Japan.
Norimasa IwasakiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-8638, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-5496-4046
Hokkaido University · JPNational Hospital Organization Hokkaido Medical Center · JP

Funding

Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan 20K17984
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe number of patients with fragility fracture has been increasing. Although the increasing number of patients with fragility fracture increased the rate of fracture (refracture), the causes of refracture are multifactorial, and its predictors are still not clarified. In this issue, we collected a registry-based longitudinal dataset that contained more than 7000 patients with fragility fractures treated surgically to detect potential predictors for clinical refracture.

methodsBased on the fact that machine learning algorithms are often used for the analysis of a large-scale dataset, we developed automatic prediction models and clarified the relevant features for patients with clinical refracture. Formats of input data containing perioperative clinical information were table data. Clinical refracture was documented as the primary outcome if the diagnosis of fracture was made at postoperative outpatient care. A decision-tree-based model, LightGBM, had moderate accuracy for the prediction in the test and the independent dataset, whereas the other models had poor accuracy or worse.

resultsFrom a clinical perspective, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) were noted as the relevant features for patients with clinical refracture, both of which were associated with secondary osteoporosis.

conclusionThe decision-tree-based algorithm showed the precise prediction of clinical refracture, in which RA and CKD were detected as the potential predictors. Understanding these predictors may improve the management of patients with fragility fractures.

Indexed as

chronic kidney diseaseclinical refracturefragility fractureLightGBMmachine learning algorithmsrheumatoid arthritis

Identifiers

PMID35407629
PMCPMC8999234
OpenAlexW4223548579

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.