Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37393281›Full record

ArticleArthroplasty (London, England)2023

Improved performance of machine learning models in predicting length of stay, discharge disposition, and inpatient mortality after total knee arthroplasty using patient-specific variables.

Leo Zalikha, Tannor Court, Fong Nham, Mouhanad M El-Othmani, Roshan P Shah

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroplasty (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Digital orthopedics in the new AI era: from ASIA aspect.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2023
    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

5 authors.

Leo ZalikhaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Detroit Medical Center, Detroit, MI, 48201, USA.
Tannor CourtDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Detroit Medical Center, Detroit, MI, 48201, USA.
Fong NhamDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Detroit Medical Center, Detroit, MI, 48201, USA. nhamfong@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6028-846X
Mouhanad M El-OthmaniDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Roshan P ShahDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to compare the performance of ten predictive models using different machine learning (ML) algorithms and compare the performance of models developed using patient-specific vs. situational variables in predicting select outcomes after primary TKA.

methodsData from 2016 to 2017 from the National Inpatient Sample were used to identify 305,577 discharges undergoing primary TKA, which were included in the training, testing, and validation of 10 ML models. 15 predictive variables consisting of 8 patient-specific and 7 situational variables were utilized to predict length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and mortality. Using the best performing algorithms, models trained using either 8 patient-specific and 7 situational variables were then developed and compared.

resultsFor models developed using all 15 variables, Linear Support Vector Machine (LSVM) was the most responsive model for predicting LOS. LSVM and XGT Boost Tree were equivalently most responsive for predicting discharge disposition. LSVM and XGT Boost Linear were equivalently most responsive for predicting mortality. Decision List, CHAID, and LSVM were the most reliable models for predicting LOS and discharge disposition, while XGT Boost Tree, Decision List, LSVM, and CHAID were most reliable for mortality. Models developed using the 8 patient-specific variables outperformed those developed using the 7 situational variables, with few exceptions.

conclusionThis study revealed that performance of different models varied, ranging from poor to excellent, and demonstrated that models developed using patient-specific variables were typically better predictive of quality metrics after TKA than those developed employing situational variables. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceLength of stayMachine learningPostoperative outcomesTotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID37393281
PMCPMC10315023

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.