Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38166909›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024

Machine learning algorithms for the prediction of adverse prognosis in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis.

Jie Yang, Jingfang Wan, Lei Feng, Shihui Hou, Kaizhen Yv, Liang Xu, Kehong Chen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jie Yang *Department of Nephrology, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, 400042, China.
Jingfang Wan *Department of Nephrology, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, 400042, China.
Lei Feng *Department of Nephrology, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, 400042, China.
Shihui HouDepartment of Nephrology, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, 400042, China.
Kaizhen YvDepartment of Nephrology, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, 400042, China.
Liang XuDepartment of Medical Engineering, The Second Affiliated Hospital of the Army Medical University, Chongqing, 400037, China. 247244526@qq.com.
Kehong ChenDepartment of Nephrology, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, 400042, China. chenkehong@foxmail.com.
Army Medical University · CNDaping Hospital · CNDalian Medical University · CNSouthwest Hospital · CN

Funding

the Chongqing Technology Innovation project 2022YSZX- JCX0007CSTB, cstc2019jscx- msxmX0258the National Natural Science Foundation of China 82270768the National Science and Technology Support Plan 2022-173ZD-112, SKLKF202201
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn appropriate prediction model for adverse prognosis before peritoneal dialysis (PD) is lacking. Thus, we retrospectively analysed patients who underwent PD to construct a predictive model for adverse prognoses using machine learning (ML).

methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 873 patients who underwent PD from August 2007 to December 2020. A total of 824 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included in the analysis. Five commonly used ML algorithms were used for the initial model training. By using the area under the curve (AUC) and accuracy (ACC), we ranked the indicators with the highest impact and displayed them using the values of Shapley additive explanation (SHAP) version 0.41.0. The top 20 indicators were selected to build a compact model that is conducive to clinical application. All model-building steps were implemented in Python 3.8.3.

resultsAt the end of follow-up, 353 patients withdrew from PD (converted to haemodialysis or died), and 471 patients continued receiving PD. In the complete model, the categorical boosting classifier (CatBoost) model exhibited the strongest performance (AUC = 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.76-0.83; ACC: 0.78, 95% CI = 0.72-0.83) and was selected for subsequent analysis. We reconstructed a compression model by extracting 20 key features ranked by the SHAP values, and the CatBoost model still showed the strongest performance (AUC = 0.79, ACC = 0.74).

conclusionsThe CatBoost model, which was built using the intelligent analysis technology of ML, demonstrated the best predictive performance. Therefore, our developed prediction model has potential value in patient screening before PD and hierarchical management after PD.

Indexed as

Peritoneal DialysisAlgorithmsHumansMachine LearningPrognosisRetrospective StudiesMachine learningPeritoneal dialysisPrediction modelPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID38166909
PMCPMC10763100
OpenAlexW4390498866

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.