ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024
Machine learning algorithms for the prediction of adverse prognosis in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis.
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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence and machine learning in peritoneal dialysis: a systematic review of clinical outcomes and predictive modeling.International urology and nephrology · 2024Pooled it
- Time-updated explainable machine learning predicts short-term mortality in peritoneal dialysis patients.Renal failure · 2026Article
- From assistant to collaborator: A systematic review of the evolution of artificial intelligence in end-stage renal disease care and management.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Integration of Federated Learning and Blockchain in Health Care: Tutorial on Medical Data, Architectures, Privacy, Security, and Regulatory Compliance.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a machine learning-based prediction model for malnutrition risk in peritoneal dialysis patients: a multi‑center retrospective study.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Dialysis Therapies:Saudi medical journal · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence Chatbots in Peritoneal Dialysis Education: A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study of Quality, Readability, and Reliability.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Performance comparison of different machine learning models to predict the risk of postcraniotomy nausea and vomiting: a retrospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Explainable machine learning algorithm to predict cardiovascular event in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Optimizing CAPD Patient Monitoring Through Automated Vs Rule-Based Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Comparative Review.International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
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
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.