ArticleScientific reports2025
Predictors and nomogram for amputation risk in pit viper snakebite envenoming at hospital admission.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Development and validation of an interpretable machine learning model for predicting 5-year recurrence in breast cancer.Frontiers in 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pit viper snakebite envenoming remains a critical global health challenge, with tissue necrosis and subsequent amputation posing significant morbidity despite antivenom availability. Existing prediction tools lack integration of dynamic laboratory parameters and iatrogenic factors, limiting their clinical utility. A retrospective cohort study analyzed 1,527 pit viper snakebite envenoming cases from the People's Hospital of Lichuan City (2012-2025). Data encompassed demographics, bite characteristics, treatment timelines, and laboratory parameters (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio [NLR], D-dimer, fibrinogen [FIB]). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses identified independent predictors, and a nomogram was constructed using R software. Model performance was evaluated via area under the curve (AUC), calibration curves, Hosmer-Lemeshow tests, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Key predictors included tourniquet misuse (OR = 15.45, 95% CI: 9.27-25.77), antivenom injection time (> 6 h; OR = 11.82, 95% CI: 7.18-19.45), the time from injury to admission (> 6 h; OR = 3.90, 95% CI: 2.46-6.20). Elevated NLR (OR = 1.25) and D-dimer (OR = 1.12) predicted amputation risk, whereas higher FIB demonstrated a non-significant protective trend (OR = 0.79, P = 0.090). The nomogram demonstrated exceptional discrimination (AUC: 0.893 training, 0.881 testing) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow P > 0.14), with high sensitivity (90-93%) and moderate specificity (68-72%). DCA confirmed clinical utility across risk thresholds (2-100%). This study highlights the interplay of temporal and laboratory parameters in amputation risk. The nomogram provides a robust tool for early risk stratification, emphasizing timely antivenom use and standardized first aid. This model offers a valuable reference for the implementation of prompt preventive and therapeutic interventions.
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.