ArticleNeurosurgical review2025
Predicting Surgical Site Infection after Lumbar Laminectomy and Discectomy: A Cutting-edge Algorithmic Approach by Incorporating Ensembled Stacking into the Current State-of-the-art for Automated Machine Learning.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 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.
- Explainable Machine Learning Predictive Models for Surgical Site Infections: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Development of Machine Learning Models for Predicting Surgical Site Infection After Spinal Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To develop an algorithmic approach for predicting surgical site infections (SSIs) in patients undergoing lumbar laminectomy and discectomy for adult degenerative spinal disease (DSD) by incorporating ensembled stacking into state-of-the-art (SOTA) automated machine learning (aML). The study utilized a comprehensive dataset from a prospective multicenter surveillance study on SSIs following lumbar laminectomy and discectomy to manage adult DSD. The Google Colab environment was adopted to load the dataset using Python programming language. Nine algorithms, including eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LGBM), Neural Network (NN), Categorical Boosting (CatBoost), and Random Forest (RF), were adopted with hyperparameter tuning using the current SOTA for aML. Ensembling of the developed algorithmic models was carried out, followed by stacking and ensembled stacking. Five-fold stratified, shuffled cross-validation was implemented. The macro-weighted average Area Under the Receiver Operating Curve (mWA-AUROC) analysis was used to evaluate the discriminating classification ability of the developed models along with other evaluation metrics. A stacked ensemble algorithmic model, comprising a stacked XGBoost model and an ensemble of XGBoost, NN, CatBoost, LGBM, and RF algorithmic models, achieved an mWA-AUROC of 0.994, an accuracy of 98.7%, a sensitivity of 90% (95% CI: 68.30% - 98.77%) and a specificity of 98.81% (95% CI: 98.15% - 99.28%) upon predicting SSI. The top-weighted constituent model, XGBoost-20, identified operative time, smoking status, and patient age as the most significant predictors of SSI. We have made the development architecture of the algorithmic model available at GitHub for external validation. This study presented a novel algorithmic approach that integrated ensembled stacking into the current SOTA for aML to predict SSIs following lumbar laminectomy and discectomy procedures for adult DSD management. The performance of the stacked ensemble model highlighted its potential to serve as a valuable tool for clinicians, enabling more informed decision-making, optimized resource utilization, and enhanced patient outcomes in spine surgery. Future research should focus on validating the performance of the model in diverse clinical settings and exploring its integration into clinical practice.
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.