ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Multiple automated machine-learning prediction models for postoperative reintubation in patients with acute aortic dissection: a multicenter cohort study.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning approaches for risk prediction in aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence as a Prognostic Tool in the Management of Acute Aortic Syndrome and Aneurysm: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Salp swarm-optimized machine learning models for predicting preoperative aortic rupture risk in acute type a aortic dissection patients.Frontiers in physiology · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Reintubation is an adverse postoperative complication in patients with Type A aortic dissection (AAD) that correlates to poor outcomes. This study aims to employ machine learning algorithms to establish a practical platform for the prediction of reintubation. Methods: A total of 861 patients diagnosed with AAD and undergoing surgical procedures, 688 patients as training and testing cohort from a single center, and 173 patients as validation cohort from four centers were enrolled. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) was used for screening risk variables associated with reintubation for subsequent model construction. Subsequently, seven machine-learning models were built. The model with the best discrimination and calibration performance was used to predict reintubation. Finally, the SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) was employed to explain the prediction model. Results: Reintubation was performed in 107 patients (12.43%). The LASSO analysis identified re-admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), continuous renal replacement therapy, length of stay in the ICU, and duration of invasive mechanical ventilation as significant risk factors for reintubation. The XGBoost model was selected as the final prediction model due to its better performance than other models, with the AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.969, 0.8889, and 0.8611 in the testing cohort. SHAP values demonstrated the effects of individual features on the overall model. Finally, a web calculator was developed based on XGBoost model for the clinical use. Conclusion: We have developed and validated a high-performing risk prediction model for postoperative reintubation in patients with AAD. It can provide valuable guidance to clinicians in predicting reintubation and in developing timely preventative measures.
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.