ArticleThe journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences2025
Machine learning prediction of survival in centenarians after age 100: a retrospective, population-based cohort study.
Article in The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhether survival at extreme ages can be accurately predicted remains unclear. This study explored the feasibility of using machine learning (ML) and electronic health records (EHRs) to predict mortality in centenarians and identify key survival determinants.
methodsWe analyzed 9718 centenarians (83% women) from the population-based EHR database in Hong Kong (2004-2018). Data were randomly split into 70% training and 30% testing cohorts. Using 82 predictors, including demographics, diagnoses, prescriptions, and laboratory results, we trained stepwise logistic regression and four ML algorithms to predict 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year all-cause mortality after age 100. Model performance was evaluated using discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC]) and calibration metrics. In an independent cohort of 174 606 oldest-old adults aged 85-105 years, we further compared AUROCs of models incorporating the identified predictors versus comorbidity and frailty scores across different age groups.
resultsAmong the ML models, eXtreme Gradient Boosting algorithm provided the best performance, with AUROCs of 0.707 (95% CI = 0.685-0.730) for 1-year mortality and 0.704 (0.686-0.723) for 2-year mortality in the testing cohort. However, all models showed poor calibration for 5-year mortality. Top three predictors of mortality included lower albumin levels, more frequent hospitalizations, and higher urea levels. Models including these predictors consistently outperformed comorbidity and frailty for mortality prediction among oldest-old adults.
conclusionsUtilizing ML models and routinely collected EHRs can predict short-term survival in centenarians with moderate accuracy. Further research is needed to determine whether mortality predictors differ across age in the oldest-old 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.