Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36547125›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2022

Stratification of Length of Stay Prediction following Surgical Cytoreduction in Advanced High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Patients Using Artificial Intelligence; the Leeds L-AI-OS Score.

Alexandros Laios, Daniel Lucas Dantas De Freitas, Gwendolyn Saalmink, Yong Sheng Tan, Racheal Johnson, Albina Zubayraeva, Sarika Munot, Richard Hutson, Amudha Thangavelu, Tim Broadhead and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Development of Multiservice Machine Learning Models to Predict Postsurgical Length of Stay and Discharge Disposition at the Time of Case Posting.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. 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

15 authors.

Alexandros LaiosESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4870-7393
Daniel Lucas Dantas De FreitasDepartment of Chemistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal 59078-970, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-4048-1606
Gwendolyn SaalminkESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1310-0281
Yong Sheng TanESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Racheal JohnsonESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2677-2709
Albina ZubayraevaESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Sarika MunotESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Richard HutsonESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8963-5517
Amudha ThangaveluESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Tim BroadheadESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
David NugentESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Evangelos KalampokisInformation Systems Lab., Department of Business Administration, University of Macedonia, 54636 Thessaloniki, Greece.ORCID 0000-0003-4416-8764
Kassio Michell Gomes de LimaDepartment of Chemistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal 59078-970, Brazil.
Georgios TheophilouESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Diederick De JongESGO Centre of Excellence for Ovarian Cancer Surgery, Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0081-674X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(1) Background: Length of stay (LOS) has been suggested as a marker of the effectiveness of short-term care. Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies could help monitor hospital stays. We developed an AI-based novel predictive LOS score for advanced-stage high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) patients following cytoreductive surgery and refined factors significantly affecting LOS. (2) Methods: Machine learning and deep learning methods using artificial neural networks (ANN) were used together with conventional logistic regression to predict continuous and binary LOS outcomes for HGSOC patients. The models were evaluated in a post-hoc internal validation set and a Graphical User Interface (GUI) was developed to demonstrate the clinical feasibility of sophisticated LOS predictions. (3) Results: For binary LOS predictions at differential time points, the accuracy ranged between 70-98%. Feature selection identified surgical complexity, pre-surgery albumin, blood loss, operative time, bowel resection with stoma formation, and severe postoperative complications (CD3-5) as independent LOS predictors. For the GUI numerical LOS score, the ANN model was a good estimator for the standard deviation of the LOS distribution by ± two days. (4) Conclusions: We demonstrated the development and application of both quantitative and qualitative AI models to predict LOS in advanced-stage EOC patients following their cytoreduction. Accurate identification of potentially modifiable factors delaying hospital discharge can further inform services performing root cause analysis of LOS.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceOvarian NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialCytoreduction Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansLength of Stayartificial intelligencedeep learningepithelial ovarian cancergraphical user interfacelength of staymachine learningsurgical cytoreduction

Identifiers

PMID36547125
PMCPMC9776955

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.