ArticleInternational journal of clinical practice2023
A Practical Model for Predicting Esophageal Variceal Rebleeding in Patients with Hepatitis B-Associated Cirrhosis.
Article in International journal of clinical practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning model for predicting rebleeding risk after endoscopic variceal ligation in esophageal variceal bleeding.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Prognostic model for esophagogastric variceal rebleeding after endoscopic treatment in liver cirrhosis: A Chinese multicenter study.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- AI in Hepatology: Revolutionizing the Diagnosis and Management of Liver Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Development and internal validation of prediction model for rebleeding within one year after endoscopic treatment of cirrhotic varices: consideration from organ-based CT radiomics signature.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Variceal rebleeding is a significant and potentially life-threatening complication of cirrhosis. Unfortunately, currently, there is no reliable method for stratifying high-risk patients. Liver stiffness measurements (LSM) have been shown to have a predictive value in identifying complications associated with portal hypertension, including first-time bleeding. However, there is a lack of evidence to confirm that LSM is reliable in predicting variceal rebleeding. The objective of our study was to evaluate the ability of generating a extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) algorithm model to improve the prediction of variceal rebleeding. Methods: This retrospective analysis examined a cohort of 284 patients with hepatitis B-related cirrhosis. XGBoost models were developed using laboratory data, LSM, and imaging data to predict the risk of rebleeding in the patients. In addition, we compared the XGBoost models with traditional logistic regression (LR) models. We evaluated and compared the two models using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and other model performance parameters. Lastly, we validated the models using nomograms and decision curve analysis (DCA). Results: During a median follow-up of 66.6 weeks, 72 patients experienced rebleeding, including 21 (7.39%) and 61 (21.48%) patients who rebleed within 6 weeks and 1 year, respectively. In brief, the AUC of the LR models in predicting rebleeding at 6 weeks and 1 year was 0.828 (0.759-0.897) and 0.799 (0.738-0.860), respectively. In contrast, the accuracy of the XGBoost model in predicting rebleeding at 6 weeks and 1 year was 0.985 (0.907-0.731) and 0.931 (0.806-0.935), respectively. LSM and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels differed significantly between the rebleeding and nonrebleeding groups, with LSM being a reliable predictor in those models. The XGBoost models outperformed the LR models in predicting rebleeding within 6 weeks and 1 year, as demonstrated by the ROC and DCA curves. Conclusion: The XGBoost algorithm model can achieve higher accuracy than the LR model in predicting rebleeding, making it a clinically beneficial tool. This implies that the XGBoost model is better suited for predicting the risk of esophageal variceal rebleeding in patients.
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.