ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Predicting the frequent exacerbator phenotype in COPD: development and validation of a multicenter real-world prediction model.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe frequent exacerbator phenotype (FEP) of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) significantly impacts quality of life, increases healthcare burden, and increases mortality rates. This study aims to develop an interpretable machine learning model for the early prediction of FEP to improve patient prognosis.
methodsRetrospective data were collected from the electronic health records (EHRs) of two hospitals for three independent cohorts of patients hospitalized for the first time due to acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD). Patients were categorized into frequent exacerbation and nonfrequent exacerbation groups on the basis of whether they experienced two or more exacerbations requiring hospitalization during a 12-month follow-up period. The feature variables were selected via univariate regression combined with the Boruta algorithm. Nine machine learning models were developed and validated via 5-fold cross-validation. The optimal prediction model was selected by integrating performance on the test set, two independent external datasets, and clinical requirements. The global and local interpretability of the model was achieved via Shapley additive explanations (SHAPs). Restricted cubic splines (RCSs) were employed to analyze the dose‒response relationships between continuous variables and the frequent exacerbator phenotype. Ultimately, the model was deployed on the Shiny platform.
resultsThis study included a development cohort of 1,310 patients and two external validation cohorts consisting of 418 and 200 patients. The datasets included 64 variables, including demographic information, blood indices, and comorbidities. Following feature screening, 14 key variables were identified to construct machine learning models. In model performance comparisons, the stacking ensemble model demonstrated superior predictive efficacy, generalization ability, and control of missed diagnosis rates. SHAP value analysis ranks the contributions of 14 key variables to the prediction of FEP. Restricted cubic spline (RCS) analysis further revealed dose‒response relationships between nine key continuous variables and FEP. Finally, the research team developed a web-based interactive prediction tool ( https://aipd.shinyapps.io/FEPCOPD/ ).
conclusionThis study developed a robust stacking ensemble prediction model for FEP in COPD patients, leveraging multidimensional clinically accessible data. By deploying an interactive prediction tool on the Shiny platform, primary care providers can conveniently utilize the model to facilitate early identification of patients with this high-risk phenotype. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: MR-43-23-040012.
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.