ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Machine learning-based predictive tools and nomogram for in-hospital mortality in critically ill cancer patients: development and external validation using retrospective cohorts.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of an explainable machine learning model for mortality prediction in ICU patients with lung cancer.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Article
- Translational Potential and Explainability of Artificial Intelligence-Based Clinical Decision Support for Adults in Intensive Care: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Construction and validation of a prognostic prediction model for critically ill lung cancer patients based on respiratory functional reserve and systemic inflammatory characteristics.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
- Liquid biopsy in cancer diagnosis and prognosis: a paradigm shift in precision oncology.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe incidence of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and the corresponding mortality rates among cancer patients are both high. However, the existing scoring systems all lack specificity. This research seeks to establish and validate a prediction model for early forecasting of in-hospital mortality in critically ill cancer patients.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted utilizing data from cancer patients obtained from the eICU and MIMIC-IV databases. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator method was employed to screen predictive factors and construct six machine learning (ML) models. These models were mainly compared in terms of their predictive performance through area under the curve (AUC) and underwent external validation. Nomograms were developed using multivariate logistic regression (LR) analysis findings. The Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method was employed to explain the variables within the ML models.
resultsTwelve predictive factors were chosen to develop the ML models. Among these models, the LR model and the eXtreme gradient boosting (XGB) model demonstrated the optimal efficacy. In the external validation cohort, their AUC values reached 0.751 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.735 - 0.768] and 0.737 (95% CI: 0.720 - 0.754), respectively. Moreover, nomograms and SHAP were employed to explain the variables. Additionally, a user-friendly web-based calculator tool was created.
conclusionsThe LR and XGB models were successfully developed to predict in-hospital mortality in critically ill cancer patients. Their robust predictive ability was demonstrated in the external validation cohorts. This model can assist physicians in clinical decision-making and timely intervention. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.