ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Breaking new ground: machine learning enhances survival forecasts in hypercapnic respiratory failure.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning for enhanced prediction of diabetic retinopathy: a comparative study on the diabetes complications data set.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Time series prediction for lung disease diagnosis and treatment optimization.Frontiers in medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The prognostic prediction of patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure holds significant clinical value. The objective of this study was to develop and validate a predictive model for predicting survival in patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure. Methods: The study enrolled a total of 697 patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure, including 565 patients from the First People's Hospital of Yancheng in the modeling group and 132 patients from the People's Hospital of Jiangsu Province in the external validation group. The three selected models were random survival forest (RSF), DeepSurv, a deep learning-based survival prediction algorithm, and Cox Proportional Risk (CoxPH). The model's predictive performance was evaluated using the C-index and Brier score. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), area under ROC curve (AUC), and decision curve analysis (DCA) were employed to assess the accuracy of predicting the prognosis for survival at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Results: The RSF model (c-index: 0.792) demonstrated superior predictive ability for the prognosis of patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure compared to both the traditional CoxPH model (c-index: 0.699) and DeepSurv model (c-index: 0.618), which was further validated on external datasets. The Brier Score of the RSF model demonstrated superior performance, consistently measuring below 0.25 at the 6-month, 12-month, 18-month, and 24-month intervals. The ROC curve confirmed the superior discrimination of the RSF model, while DCA demonstrated its optimal clinical net benefit in both the modeling group and the external validation group. Conclusion: The RSF model offered distinct advantages over the CoxPH and DeepSurv models in terms of clinical evaluation and monitoring of patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure.
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.