ArticleBMJ open2025
Factors associated with admission to elderly medical-welfare facilities in South Korea: a cross-sectional machine-learning study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Leveraging machine learning for accurate forecasting of pulmonary tuberculosis epidemics in a coastal city in China.Tropical medicine and health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify the key factors associated with admission to elderly medical-welfare facilities in South Korea and to evaluate their relative importance using machine learning techniques, providing an evidence base for policy in a rapidly ageing society.
designA cross-sectional secondary data analysis.
settingThe analysis was conducted using the National Health Insurance Service -Senior database, a large-scale public dataset constructed to be statistically representative of the elderly population in South Korea.
participantsA total of 48 614 elderly individuals aged 60-80 years, selected through a scientifically rigorous stratified random sampling method. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the binary classification of an individual's long-term care arrangement: admission to a facility-based service versus utilisation of home-based care. The secondary outcome was the relative importance and contribution of a wide range of demographic, health-status and care-related variables in predicting facility admission.
resultsAfter addressing severe class imbalance with the synthetic minority over-sampling technique, our final random forest model demonstrated excellent predictive power, achieving a sensitivity of 0.856 and a balanced accuracy of 0.921. An analysis of feature importance using Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) revealed that the most dominant predictor was an individual's cohabitation with institutional staff (mean SHAP value ≈ 0.180), indicating pre-existing contact with the formal care system. Other critical factors included the absence of a primary caregiver (≈ 0.056), being fully dependent due to dementia (≈ 0.017) and the degree of functional impairment as measured by the activities of daily living (ADL) score (≈ 0.017).
conclusionAdmission to medical-welfare facilities in South Korea is a multifactorial issue, most strongly driven by the erosion of informal care support systems combined with severe health decline, particularly in cognitive and physical function. These evidence-based findings highlight the need for policy interventions that strengthen community-based integrated care and enhance support for family caregivers. Such strategies are essential for promoting ageing-in-place, ensuring the long-term sustainability of the public long-term care system and ultimately improving the quality of life for the nation's growing elderly population.
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.