Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38834975›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024

Prediction of subsequent fragility fractures: application of machine learning.

Mozhdeh Zabihiyeganeh, Alireza Mirzaei, Pouria Tabrizian, Aryan Rezaee, Abbas Sheikhtaheri, Azade Amini Kadijani, Bahare Amini Kadijani, Ali Sharifi Kia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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.

Mozhdeh ZabihiyeganehBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, University of Medical Sciences, Baharestan Sq, Tehran, Iran.
Alireza MirzaeiBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, University of Medical Sciences, Baharestan Sq, Tehran, Iran.
Pouria TabrizianBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, University of Medical Sciences, Baharestan Sq, Tehran, Iran.
Aryan RezaeeBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, University of Medical Sciences, Baharestan Sq, Tehran, Iran.
Abbas SheikhtaheriDepartment of Health Information Management, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Azade Amini KadijaniBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, University of Medical Sciences, Baharestan Sq, Tehran, Iran.
Bahare Amini KadijaniDepartment of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
Ali Sharifi KiaBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, University of Medical Sciences, Baharestan Sq, Tehran, Iran. Ashari45@uwo.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMachine learning (ML) has shown exceptional promise in various domains of medical research. However, its application in predicting subsequent fragility fractures is still largely unknown. In this study, we aim to evaluate the predictive power of different ML algorithms in this area and identify key features associated with the risk of subsequent fragility fractures in osteoporotic patients.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed data from patients presented with fragility fractures at our Fracture Liaison Service, categorizing them into index fragility fracture (n = 905) and subsequent fragility fracture groups (n = 195). We independently trained ML models using 27 features for both male and female cohorts. The algorithms tested include Random Forest, XGBoost, CatBoost, Logistic Regression, LightGBM, AdaBoost, Multi-Layer Perceptron, and Support Vector Machine. Model performance was evaluated through 10-fold cross-validation.

resultsThe CatBoost model outperformed other models, achieving 87% accuracy and an AUC of 0.951 for females, and 93.4% accuracy with an AUC of 0.990 for males. The most significant predictors for females included age, serum C-reactive protein (CRP), 25(OH)D, creatinine, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), parathyroid hormone (PTH), femoral neck Z-score, menopause age, number of pregnancies, phosphorus, calcium, and body mass index (BMI); for males, the predictors were serum CRP, femoral neck T-score, PTH, hip T-score, BMI, BUN, creatinine, alkaline phosphatase, and spinal Z-score.

conclusionML models, especially CatBoost, offer a valuable approach for predicting subsequent fragility fractures in osteoporotic patients. These models hold the potential to enhance clinical decision-making by supporting the development of personalized preventative strategies.

Indexed as

Machine LearningOsteoporotic FracturesAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteoporosisPredictive Value of TestsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsData miningFragility fractureMachine learningOsteoporosisSubsequent fracture

Identifiers

PMID38834975
PMCPMC11149176

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.