Observational studyJMIR medical informatics2025
Machine Learning-Based Prediction of In-Hospital Falls in Adult Inpatients: Retrospective Observational Multicenter Study.
Observational study in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between early in-hospital physiological and functional changes and fall risk in older adults: a retrospective multicenter cohort study.European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Explainable SHAP-space fall risk profiling from electronic health records for inpatient prevention planning.npj health systems · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of an Interpretable Machine Learning Model for Inpatient Fall Risk Using Electronic Health Record Data.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
- Association between hypnotic medication use and in-hospital falls among older adults: A multicenter landmark analysis.PloS one · 2026Article
- Admission clinical and functional assessments for predicting inpatient fall risk using machine learning models.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFalls among hospitalized patients are a critical issue that often leads to prolonged hospital stays and increased health care costs. Traditional fall risk assessments typically rely on standardized scoring systems; however, these may fail to capture the complex and multifactorial nature of fall risk factors.
objectiveThis retrospective observational multicenter study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning-based model to predict in-hospital falls and to evaluate its performance in terms of discrimination and calibration.
methodsWe analyzed the data of 83,917 inpatients aged 65 years and older with a hospital stay of at least 3 days. Using Diagnosis Procedure Combination data and laboratory results, we extracted demographic, clinical, functional, and pharmacological variables. Following the selection of 30 key features, 4 predictive models were constructed: logistic regression, extreme gradient boosting, light gradient boosting machine (LGBM), and categorical boosting (CatBoost). The synthetic minority oversampling technique and isotonic regression calibration were applied to improve the prediction quality and address class imbalance.
resultsFalls occurred in 2173 (2.6%) patients. CatBoost achieved the highest F
conclusionsCatBoost and LGBM offer clinically valuable prediction performance, with CatBoost favored for high-risk patient identification and LGBM for probability-based intervention thresholds. Integrating such models into electronic health records could enable real-time risk scoring and trigger targeted interventions (eg, toileting assistance and mobility support). Future work should incorporate dynamic, time-varying patient data to improve real-time risk prediction.
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.