ArticleJournal of nephrology2024
External validation of a 2-year all-cause mortality prediction tool developed using machine learning in patients with stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease.
Article in Journal of nephrology, 2024. 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.
- Applications of Machine Learning for Early Diagnosis and Prognosis of Chronic Kidney Disease: Current Evidence.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- CKD-M2 study: 2-year mortality prediction tool for advanced kidney disease.BMC nephrology · 2025Article
- Chronic kidney Disease overall survival prediction model based on frailty index score: construction and validation using NHANES data.Renal failure · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with increased mortality. Individual mortality prediction could be of interest to improve individual clinical outcomes. Using an independent regional dataset, the aim of the present study was to externally validate the recently published 2-year all-cause mortality prediction tool developed using machine learning.
methodsA validation dataset of stage 4 or 5 CKD outpatients was used. External validation performance of the prediction tool at the optimal cutoff-point was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. A survival analysis was then performed using the Kaplan-Meier method.
resultsData of 527 outpatients with stage 4 or 5 CKD were analyzed. During the 2 years of follow-up, 91 patients died and 436 survived. Compared to the learning dataset, patients in the validation dataset were significantly younger, and the ratio of deceased patients in the validation dataset was significantly lower. The performance of the prediction tool at the optimal cutoff-point was: AUC-ROC = 0.72, accuracy = 63.6%, sensitivity = 72.5%, and specificity = 61.7%. The survival curves of the predicted survived and the predicted deceased groups were significantly different (p < 0.001).
conclusionThe 2-year all-cause mortality prediction tool for patients with stage 4 or 5 CKD showed satisfactory discriminatory capacity with emphasis on sensitivity. The proposed prediction tool appears to be of clinical interest for further development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38965199What 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.