ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Implementing AI Models for Prognostic Predictions in High-Risk Burn Patients.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advanced Grafting Biomaterials and Technologies in Chronic Wound Care: Mechanisms, Clinical Outcomes, and Therapeutic Integration.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- The Rise of Intelligent Plastic Surgery: A 10-Year Bibliometric Journey Through AI Applications, Challenges, and Transformative Potential.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- The role of artificial intelligence in burn assessment, complication diagnosis, and outcome prediction: a narrative review.Burns & trauma · 2026Review
- Simultaneous prediction of early and delayed mortality in burn patients: a comparative machine learning analysis of feature importance in a single-center retrospective study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Review
- Implementation and Updating of Clinical Prediction Models: A Systematic Review.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Review
- Strategies for Optimizing Acute Burn Wound Therapy: A Comprehensive Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in plastic surgery, where do we stand?JPRAS open · 2024Review
- Adipokines-A Cohort Prospective Study in Children with Severe Burns.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence as a Triage Tool during the Perioperative Period: Pilot Study of Accuracy and Accessibility for Clinical Application.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 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 AND
objectivesBurn injuries range from minor medical issues to severe, life-threatening conditions. The severity and location of the burn dictate its treatment; while minor burns might be treatable at home, severe burns necessitate medical intervention, sometimes in specialized burn centers with extended follow-up care. This study aims to leverage artificial intelligence (AI)/machine learning (ML) to forecast potential adverse effects in burn patients.
methodsThis retrospective analysis considered burn patients admitted to Chi Mei Medical Center from 2010 to 2019. The study employed 14 features, comprising supplementary information like prior comorbidities and laboratory results, for building models for predicting graft surgery, a prolonged hospital stay, and overall adverse effects. Overall, 70% of the data set trained the AI models, with the remaining 30% reserved for testing. Three ML algorithms of random forest, LightGBM, and logistic regression were employed with evaluation metrics of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).
resultsIn this research, out of 224 patients assessed, the random forest model yielded the highest AUC for predictions related to prolonged hospital stays (>14 days) at 81.1%, followed by the XGBoost (79.9%) and LightGBM (79.5%) models. Besides, the random forest model of the need for a skin graft showed the highest AUC (78.8%), while the random forest model and XGBoost model of the occurrence of adverse complications both demonstrated the highest AUC (87.2%) as well. Based on the best models with the highest AUC values, an AI prediction system is designed and integrated into hospital information systems to assist physicians in the decision-making process.
conclusionsAI techniques showcased exceptional capabilities for predicting a prolonged hospital stay, the need for a skin graft, and the occurrence of overall adverse complications for burn patients. The insights from our study fuel optimism for the inception of a novel predictive model that can seamlessly meld with hospital information systems, enhancing clinical decisions and bolstering physician-patient dialogues.
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.