ArticleBMC gastroenterology2025
Explainable machine learning model for predicting acute pancreatitis mortality in the intensive care unit.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Management and Prediction of Acute Pancreatitis Severity Using AI: A Surgical Perspective.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Development of an interpretable machine learning model for predicting new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients with sepsis-associated acute kidney injury: A retrospective cohort study.Science progress · 2026Article
- Predicting recurrent chest pain in patients with myocardial bridging using explainable machine learning: a multicenter study integrating CT-derived functional and inflammatory imaging biomarkers.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Acute pancreatitis: mechanisms and therapeutic approaches.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- Development and validation of an interpretable machine-learning model for predicting treatment failure in severe trauma patients.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Lactate Dehydrogenase, Interleukin-6, and 24 h Intra-Abdominal Pressure Exhibit Early Predictive Value in Hypertriglyceridemic Pancreatitis Complicated by Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Emergency medicine international · 2026Article
- Predicting the acute pancreatitis severity with multi-machine learning models: constructing an online prediction platform.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Additional considerations on a combination of inflammatory markers and scoring systems for early severity stratification of acute pancreatitis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Development and prospective evaluation of a machine learning model to predict serious cardiac outcomes among paediatric cardiac inpatients.BMJ digital health & AI · 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
Abstract
backgroundCurrent prediction models are suboptimal for determining mortality risk in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP); this might be improved by using a machine learning (ML) model. In this study, we aimed to construct an explainable ML model to calculate the risk of mortality in patients with AP admitted in intensive care unit (ICU) and compared it with existing scoring systems.
methodsA gradient-boosting ML (XGBoost) model was developed and externally validated based on two public databases: Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC, training cohort) and the eICU Collaborative Research Database (eICU-CRD, validation cohort). We compared the performance of the XGBoost model with validated clinical risk scoring systems (the APACHE IV, SOFA, and Bedside Index for Severity in Acute Pancreatitis [BISAP]) by area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis. SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) method was applied to provide the explanation behind the prediction outcome.
resultsThe XGBoost model performed better than the clinical scoring systems in correctly predicting mortality risk of AP patients, achieving an AUC of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.84-0.94). When set the sensitivity at 100% for death prediction, the model had a specificity of 38%, much higher than the APACHE IV, SOFA and BISAP score, which had a specificity of 1%, 16% and 1% respectively.
conclusionsThis model might increase identification of very low-risk patients who can be safely monitored in a general ward for management. By making the model explainable, physicians would be able to better understand the reasoning behind the prediction.
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.