ArticleScientific reports2025
External validation of an artificial intelligence model using clinical variables, including ICD-10 codes, for predicting in-hospital mortality among trauma patients: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in chronic kidney disease: Early detection, risk prediction, and personalized treatment strategies.World journal of nephrology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence For 6P Medicine: Consolidating AI Needs of Predictive, Preventive, Personalized, Participatory, Precision, and Public Health Trajectories.Journal of medical systems · 2026Review
- Article
- Designing an explainable algorithm based on XGBoost and genetic algorithm for predicting hospitalization needs of COVID-19 patients.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Prehospital real-time AI for trauma mortality prediction: a multi-institutional and multi-national validation study.Nature communications · 2026Article
- What is the impact of the virome and mycobiome on female reproductive tract health? A systematic scoping review.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- On-scene machine learning prediction model for massive transfusion in trauma and its association with in-hospital mortality.BJS open · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence for surgical scene understanding: a systematic review and reporting quality meta-analysis.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Feasibility of AI-simulated patients for tailored selection of diabetes remission prediction models in metabolic bariatric surgery: a proof-of-concept study.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2025Article
- Epidemiological characteristics of pediatric trauma and the role of the Injury Severity Score in predicting mortality risk: a multicenter study.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Random Forest Machine Learning Matches Human Expert Accuracy in Trauma Severity Scoring.World journal of surgery · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence models for predicting pulmonary complications in patients with chest trauma: a retrospective study.Journal of trauma and injury · 2025Article
- Mapping artificial intelligence models in emergency medicine: A scoping review on artificial intelligence performance in emergency care and education.Turkish journal of emergency medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is being increasingly applied in healthcare to improve patient care and clinical outcomes. We previously developed an AI model using ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision) codes with other clinical variables to predict in-hospital mortality among trauma patients from a nationwide database. This study aimed to externally validate the performance of the AI model. Validation was conducted using a multicenter retrospective cohort study design, analyzing patient data from January 2020 to December 2021. The study included trauma patients based on specific ICD-10 codes, with other clinical variables. The performance of the AI model was evaluated against conventional metrics, including the ISS, and the ICISS (ICD-based ISS), using sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, balanced accuracy, precision, F1-score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) analyses. Data from 4,439 patients were analyzed. The AI model demonstrated high overall performance, achieving an AUROC of 0.9448 and a balanced accuracy of 85.08%, thereby outperforming traditional scoring systems such as ISS, or ICISS. Furthermore, the model accurately predicted mortality across datasets from each hospital (AUROCs of 0.9234 and 0.9653, respectively) despite significant differences in hospital characteristics. In the subset of patients with ISS < 9, the model showed a robust AUROC of 0.9043, indicating its effectiveness in predicting mortality, even in cases with lower-severity injuries. For patients with ISSs ≥ 9, the model maintained high sensitivity (93.60%) and balanced accuracy (77.08%), proving its reliability in more severe injury cases. External validation demonstrated the AI model's high predictive accuracy and reliability in assessing in-hospital mortality risk among trauma patients across different injury severities and heterogeneous cohorts. These findings support the model's potential integration into emergency departments and offer a significant tool for enhancing patient triage and treatment protocols.
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.