ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of time-to-event machine learning models in predicting biliary complication and mortality rate in liver transplant patients.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Post-Liver Transplantation: A Scoping Review of Comparative Model Performance.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Machine learning driven precision medicine in tacrolimus dosing: current research and future perspectives in liver and kidney transplantation.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Review
- Artificial intelligence in liver transplantation: Opportunities and challenges.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Post-Liver transplantation (LT) survival rates stagnate, with biliary complications (BC) as a major cause of death. We analyzed longitudinal data with a median 19-month follow-up. BC was diagnosed with ultrasounds and MRCP. Missing data was imputed using mean and median. Data preprocessing involved feature scaling and one-hot encoding. Survival analysis used filter (Cox-P, Cox-c) and embedded (RSF, LASSO) feature selection methods. Seven survival machine learning algorithms were used: LASSO, Ridge, RSF, E-NET, GBS, C-GBS, and FS-SVM. Model development employed 5-fold cross-validation, random oversampling, and hyperparameter tuning. Random oversampling addressed data imbalance. Optimal hyperparameters were determined based on average C-index. Features importance was assessed using standardized regression coefficients and permutation importance for top models. Stability was evaluated using 5-fold cross-validation standard deviation. Finally, 1799 observations with 40 outcome predictors were included. RSF with Ridge achieved the highest performance (C-index: 0.699) for BC prediction, while RSF with RSF had the highest performance (C-index: 0.784) for mortality prediction. Top BC predictors were LT graft types, IBD in recipients, recipient's BMI, recipient's history of PVT, and previous LT history. For mortality, they were post-transplant AST, creatinine, recipient's age, post-transplant ALT, and tacrolimus consumption. We identified BC and mortality risk factors, improving decision-making and outcomes.
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.