ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Development and validation of a machine learning model to predict postoperative complications following radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Artificial Intelligence in Gastric Cancer: Diagnostic, Prognostic, and Predictive Developments, Evidence Maturity, and Translational Challenges.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Review
- Comparative contributions of visceral adiposity and muscle-related parameters to postoperative complications after gastrectomy: a domain-based analysis.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Perioperative nutritional support is associated with attenuated early postoperative albumin decline after gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a retrospective cohort study and machine learning prediction model.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Malnutrition predicts severe complications but not survival in laryngeal cancer surgery: a propensity-matched analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 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
Objective: Postoperative complications significantly adversely affect recovery and prognosis following radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. We developed and validated machine learning (ML) models to predict these complications and constructed a clinically applicable dynamic nomogram. Methods: Using a prospectively maintained database, we conducted a retrospective analysis of 1,486 patients from Fujian Cancer Hospital (training cohort) and 498 from the First Hospital of Putian City (validation cohort). Feature selection integrated Lasso regression, the Boruta algorithm, and Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE). Six ML models were developed and evaluated: TreeBagger (TB), Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Gaussian Naïve Bayes (GNB), and Artificial Neural Network (ANN). The significant predictors identified were incorporated into a logistic regression model to determine independent risk factors, which then formed the basis of a dynamic nomogram deployed as an interactive web application for clinical use. Results: RF demonstrated numerically superior performance among the evaluated models in both cohorts. Independent risk factors included age, BMI, diabetes mellitus, ASA grade, operative time, and surgical approach. The dynamic nomogram achieved AUCs of 0.805 (training) and 0.856 (validation), with calibration curves and decision curve analysis confirming its reliability. DeLong's test revealed no significant difference in AUC between the RF model and nomogram in either cohort (training: Z = -0.385, p = 0.701; validation: Z = -1.756, p = 0.058). Conclusion: While the RF model provided optimal predictive accuracy among ML algorithms, the interpretable nomogram offers comparable discrimination and clinical accessibility. Both tools facilitate the early identification of high-risk patients, enabling personalized interventions to optimize postoperative recovery.
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.