SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2023
Estimating postoperative mortality in colorectal surgery- a systematic review of risk prediction models.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence in surgical decision-making across the perioperative continuum: a scoping review.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Unsupervised Machine Learning to Identify Patient Clusters and Tailor Perioperative Care in Colorectal Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Wearable Sensors as a Preoperative Assessment Tool: A Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeRisk prediction models are frequently used to support decision-making in colorectal surgery but can be inaccurate. Machine learning (ML) is becoming increasingly popular, and its application may increase predictive accuracy. We compared conventional risk prediction models for postoperative mortality (based on regression analysis) with ML models to determine the benefit of the latter approach.
methodsThe study was registered in PROSPERO(CRD42022364753). Following the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search of three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, WoS) was conducted (from 1/1/2000 to 29/09/2022). Studies were included if they reported the development of a risk model to estimate short-term postoperative mortality for patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Discrimination and calibration performance metrics were compared. Studies were evaluated against CHARMS and TRIPOD criteria.
results3,052 articles were screened, and 45 studies were included. The total sample size was 1,356,058 patients. Six studies used ML techniques for model development. Most studies (n = 42) reported the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) as a measure of discrimination. There was no significant difference in the mean AUROC values between regression models (0.833 s.d. ± 0.52) and ML (0.846 s.d. ± 0.55), p = 0.539. Calibration statistics, which measure the agreement between predicted estimates and observed outcomes, were less consistent. Risk of bias assessment found most concerns in the data handling and analysis domains of eligible studies.
conclusionsOur study showed comparable predictive performance between regression and ML methods in colorectal surgery. Integration of ML in colorectal risk prediction is promising but further refinement of the models is required to support routine clinical adoption.
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.