Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37887972›Full record

ArticleGeriatrics (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Development of a Machine Learning-Based Model to Predict Timed-Up-and-Go Test in Older Adults.

Moritz Kraus, Ulla Cordula Stumpf, Alexander Martin Keppler, Carl Neuerburg, Wolfgang Böcker, Henning Wackerhage, Sebastian Felix Baumbach, Maximilian Michael Saller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

8 authors.

Moritz KrausDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich, University Hospital of Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU), 81377 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6488-1009
Ulla Cordula StumpfDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich, University Hospital of Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU), 81377 Munich, Germany.
Alexander Martin KepplerDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich, University Hospital of Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU), 81377 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1800-5278
Carl NeuerburgDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich, University Hospital of Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU), 81377 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1373-093X
Wolfgang BöckerDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich, University Hospital of Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU), 81377 Munich, Germany.
Henning WackerhageFaculty of Sport and Health Sciences, Technical University of Munich, 80809 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5920-5842
Sebastian Felix BaumbachDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich, University Hospital of Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU), 81377 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6287-6206
Maximilian Michael SallerDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Musculoskeletal University Center Munich, University Hospital of Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU), 81377 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8774-7892

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe measurement of physical frailty in elderly patients with orthopedic impairments remains a challenge due to its subjectivity, unreliability, time-consuming nature, and limited applicability to uninjured individuals. Our study aims to address this gap by developing objective, multifactorial machine models that do not rely on mobility data and subsequently validating their predictive capacity concerning the Timed-up-and-Go test (TUG test) in orthogeriatric patients.

methodsWe utilized 67 multifactorial non-mobility parameters in a pre-processing phase, employing six feature selection algorithms. Subsequently, these parameters were used to train four distinct machine learning algorithms, including a generalized linear model, a support vector machine, a random forest algorithm, and an extreme gradient boost algorithm. The primary goal was to predict the time required for the TUG test without relying on mobility data.

resultsThe random forest algorithm yielded the most accurate estimations of the TUG test time. The best-performing algorithm demonstrated a mean absolute error of 2.7 s, while the worst-performing algorithm exhibited an error of 7.8 s. The methodology used for variable selection appeared to exert minimal influence on the overall performance. It is essential to highlight that all the employed algorithms tended to overestimate the time for quick patients and underestimate it for slower patients.

conclusionOur findings demonstrate the feasibility of predicting the TUG test time using a machine learning model that does not depend on mobility data. This establishes a basis for identifying patients at risk automatically and objectively assessing the physical capacity of currently immobilized patients. Such advancements could significantly contribute to enhancing patient care and treatment planning in orthogeriatric settings.

Indexed as

ageclinical assessmentfrailtymachine learningosteoporosisTUG test

Identifiers

PMID37887972
PMCPMC10606325

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.