Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40948509›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2025

External validation of predictive models for diagnosis, management and severity of pediatric appendicitis.

Ričards Marcinkevičs, Kacper Sokol, Akhil Paulraj, Melinda A Hilbert, Vivien Rimili, Sven Wellmann, Christian Knorr, Bertram Reingruber, Julia E Vogt, Patricia Reis Wolfertstetter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Ričards Marcinkevičs *Department of Computer Science, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Kacper Sokol *Department of Computer Science, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Akhil PaulrajDepartment of Computer Science, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Melinda A HilbertDepartment of Pediatric Surgery and Pediatric Traumatology, Florence-Nightingale-Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Vivien RimiliFaculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Sven WellmannFaculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Christian KnorrDepartment of Pediatric Surgery and Pediatric Orthopedics, Hospital St. Hedwig of the Order of St. John of God, University Children's Hospital Regensburg (KUNO), Regensburg, Germany.
Bertram ReingruberDepartment of Pediatric Surgery and Pediatric Traumatology, Florence-Nightingale-Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Julia E VogtDepartment of Computer Science, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Patricia Reis WolfertstetterFaculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Appendicitis is a common condition among children and adolescents. Machine learning models can offer much-needed tools for improved diagnosis, severity assessment and management guidance for pediatric appendicitis. However, to be adopted in practice, such systems must be reliable, safe and robust across various medical contexts, e.g., hospitals with distinct clinical practices and patient populations. Methods: We performed external validation of models predicting the diagnosis, management and severity of pediatric appendicitis. Trained on a cohort of 430 patients admitted to the Children's Hospital St. Hedwig (Regensburg, Germany), the models were validated on an independent cohort of 301 patients from the Florence-Nightingale-Hospital (Düsseldorf, Germany). The data included demographic, clinical, scoring, laboratory and ultrasound parameters. In addition, we explored the benefits of model retraining and inspected variable importance. Results: The distributions of most parameters differed between the datasets. Consequently, we saw a decrease in predictive performance for diagnosis, management and severity across most metrics. After retraining with a portion of external data, we observed gains in performance, which, nonetheless, remained lower than in the original study. Notably, the most important variables were consistent across the datasets. Conclusions: While the performance of transferred models was satisfactory, it remained lower than on the original data. This study demonstrates challenges in transferring models between hospitals, especially when clinical practice and demographics differ or in the presence of externalities such as pandemics. We also highlight the limitations of retraining as a potential remedy since it could not restore predictive performance to the initial level.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceevaluationmachine learningmedical decision support systemspredictive modeling

Identifiers

PMID40948509
PMCPMC12426264

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.