ArticleScientific reports2025
Parsimonious and explainable machine learning for predicting mortality in patients post hip fracture surgery.
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 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.
- Are machine learning models superior to logistic regression models to predict 30-day mortality post-hip fracture surgery?JBMR plus · 2026Article
- Supervised Machine Learning-Based Prediction of In-Hospital Mortality Following Hip Fracture in Older Adults.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Preliminary testing of a prespecified liability architecture for autism: theory-guided pathogenetic triad models outperform strength-matched alternatives.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hip fractures among the elderly population continue to present significant risks and high mortality rates despite advancements in surgical procedures. In this study, we developed machine learning (ML) algorithms to estimate 30-day mortality risk post-hip fracture surgery in the elderly using data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP 2012-2017, n = 62,492 patients). Our approach involves two models: one estimating the patients' 30-day mortality risk based on pre-operative conditions, and another considering both pre-operative and post-operative factors. We performed comprehensive data cleaning and preprocessing, then applied tenfold cross-validation with randomized search to the training set to identify optimal hyperparameters for various machine learning models. We used logistic regression, Naive Bayes, random forest, AdaBoost, XGBoost, CatBoost, Gradient Boosting, and LightGBM. The models' performances were evaluated on the test set using the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC). The best pre-operative model was AdaBoost, achieving an AUC of 0.792 with 29 features (predictors), and the best post-operative model was CatBoost, achieving an AUC of 0.885 with 45 features. After modeling, we derived feature importance for each of the two models and decreased the number of features to reach a parsimonious highly performing model. The pre-operative model achieves an AUC of 0.725 with the eight most important features and the post-operative model achieves an AUC of 0.8529 with the six most important features. To ensure the models' decision-making is compatible with clinical decisions and common practices, we applied explainability techniques such as SHAP to reveal the patterns learned by the models. These patterns were found to be clinically plausible. In summary, our approach involving data preprocessing, model tuning, feature selection, and explainability achieved state-of-the-art performance in predicting 30-day mortality rates following hip fractures surgery using a limited set of features, making it highly applicable in clinical settings.
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.