ArticleClinics in orthopedic surgery2023
Predicting Prolonged Wound Drainage after Hemiarthroplasty for Hip Fractures: A Stacked Machine Learning Study.
Article in Clinics in orthopedic surgery, 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning-based prediction of retear after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a multicenter cohort study.JSES international · 2026Article
- Early Prediction of 90-Day Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Hip Arthroplasty for Proximal Femur Fracture Using Machine Learning: Development and Temporal Validation of a Predictive Model.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Surgery: A Systematic Review of Use and Validation.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prolonged wound drainage (PWD) is one of the most important reasons that increase the risk of early periprosthetic joint infection after arthroplasty. It is very important to evaluate the risk factors for PWD in the surgical field after arthroplasty surgery. This can be accomplished using machine learning or artificial intelligence methods. Our aim in this study was to compare machine learning methods in predicting possible PWD. Methods: The study was carried out on clinical, laboratory, and radiological data of 313 patients who underwent hemiarthroplasty (HA) for proximal femur fractures. We preprocessed the dataset and trained and tested machine learning methods using cross validation. We compared various machine learning algorithms (linear discriminant analysis, decision tree, k-nearest neighbors, gradient boosting machine, and logistic regression [LR]) based on performance measures. We also combined the most successful algorithms with a metaclassifier. To help understand the relationship between risk factors, we provided a risk factor severity ranking. Results: To estimate the risk of PWD, classification was performed with first-level classifiers and then integrated as a LR-based meta-learner stacking method. More performance improvements were achieved with the stacking method. Conclusions: We found that the stacking method was superior to other methods in PWD classification. We determined that the volume of fluid collected from the drain, morbid obesity class, blood transfusion, and body mass index score were the four most important risk factors according to stacking.
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.