Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40275206›Full record

ArticleBMC gastroenterology2025

Risk prediction and effect evaluation of complicated appendicitis based on XGBoost modeling.

Sunmeng Chen, Jianfu Xia, Beibei Xu, Yi Huang, Miaomiao Teng, Juyi Pan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sunmeng Chen *Department of General Surgery, The Dingli Clinical College of Wenzhou Medical University (Wenzhou Central Hospital), Wenzhou, Zhejiang, 325000, China.
Jianfu Xia *Department of General Surgery, The Dingli Clinical College of Wenzhou Medical University (Wenzhou Central Hospital), Wenzhou, Zhejiang, 325000, China.
Beibei XuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Wenzhou Third Clinical Institute Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Shanghai University, No 57, Cang Hou Street, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, 325000, China.
Yi HuangDepartment of General Surgery, Wenzhou Third Clinical Institute Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Shanghai University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, 325000, China.
Miaomiao TengDepartment of Gastroenterology, Postgraduate Training Base Alliance of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, 325000, China.
Juyi PanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Wenzhou Third Clinical Institute Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Shanghai University, No 57, Cang Hou Street, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, 325000, China. panjuyi@126.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe distinction between complicated appendicitis (CAP) and uncomplicated appendicitis (UAP) remains challenging. The purpose of this study was to construct a safe and economical diagnostic model that can accurately and rapidly differentiate between CAP and UAP.

methodsPatient data from 773 appendectomies were retrospectively collected, important features were selected using random forests, and the data were divided into training and test sets in a 3:1 ratio. An integrated learning algorithm, Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), was introduced to predict the risk of CAP and compared with Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest (RF), and Decision Tree (CART) algorithms. A comprehensive comparison of the four algorithms was performed using model performance metrics such as the area under the receiver's operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, precision, negative predictive value(NPV), positive predictive value(PPV),calibration curves, and clinical decision curve analysis (DCA).

resultThe results show that all four prediction models exhibit some predictive ability. The XGBoost model showed the best prediction with AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity,NPV and PPV of 0.914, 0.855, 0.865, 0.846,0.848 and 0.897, respectively, followed by the SVM model with results of AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity,NPV and PPV of 0.882, 0.819, 0.865, 0.779, 0.770 and 0.871, respectively. XGBoost and SVM models show very good calibration. The XGBoost model showed better net clinical benefit compared to the DCA curves of the other models.

conclusionPredictive models based on the XGBoost algorithm have good performance in predicting the risk of acute appendicitis progressing to complicated appendicitis, which helps to optimize clinical decision making.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAppendicitisAdolescentAdultAppendectomyArea Under CurveBoosting Machine Learning AlgorithmsDecision TreesFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentComplicated appendicitisDisease risk predictionMachine learningPredictive modelingXGBoost model

Identifiers

PMID40275206
PMCPMC12023617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.