ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2025
Development of an XGBoost-based prediction model for wound recurrence risk in diabetic foot ulcer patients treated with antibiotic-loaded bone cement.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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.
- AI-Enhanced System for Diabetic Foot Ulcer Localization and Classification Using Multi-Scale Neural CNN Model.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Machine Learning for Preoperative Prediction of Intraoperative Hypothermia in Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aims to improve the surgical cure rate, develop interventions to reduce the incidence of postoperative nonunion or recurrence of diabetic foot wounds, and formulate an optimal prediction model to quantify the predictive risk value of antibiotic bone-cement failure in the treatment of diabetic foot. Methods: The training and test sets were created once the cases were collected. Based on feature correlation, feature importance, and feature weight, LASSO analysis, random forest, and the Pearson correlation coefficient approach were used to identify the features. Artificial neural network, support vector machine, and XGBoost prediction models were built according to the selected optimal features. The receiver operating characteristic curve, precision-recall (PR) curve, and decision curve analysis were utilized to validate the performance of the models and select the optimal prediction model. Lastly, an independent test set was created to assess and determine the best model's capacity for generalization. Results: A comparative analysis revealed that the area under the curve (AUC) for the training set of the PRL-XGBoost prediction model was 0.85 and that for the test set was 0.71. This finding suggests that the model exhibits good predictive ability. Moreover, the PR-AUC value of the prediction model was 0.97, indicating that it demonstrates good resistance to overfitting. Additionally, the DCA curve showed that the PRL-XGBoost prediction model has significant application value and practicality. Therefore, PRL-XGBoost was found to be the most effective prediction model. Conclusions: The findings from this study prove that γ-glutamyl transpeptidase, lipoprotein A, peripheral vascular disease, peripheral neuropathy, and white blood cells are the key indices that affect the surgical outcome. These parameters determine the nutritional and immune status of the lower limb endings, leading to ulceration, infection, and nonunion of the diabetic foot. Hence, the PRL-XGBoost prediction model can be applied for the preoperative evaluation and screening of patients with diabetic foot treated with antibiotic bone cement, resulting in favorable clinical outcomes.
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.