Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41419556›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Development and validation of a risk prediction model for postoperative urinary retention after gynecologic abdominal-pelvic surgery.

Jiahao Shi, Youbei Lin, Xiaojing Qin, Yinghui Gong, Hongyu Li

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jiahao ShiJinzhou Medical University, Jinzhou, China.
Youbei LinJinzhou Medical University, Jinzhou, China.
Xiaojing QinThe Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Yinghui GongJinzhou Medical University, Jinzhou, China.
Hongyu LiJinzhou Medical University, Jinzhou, China. reda4673@sina.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study developed prediction models using 12 machine learning (ML) algorithms and, through comprehensive evaluation, selected the optimal model to predict postoperative urinary retention after gynecologic abdominal-pelvic surgery. An online calculator was created to provide reference for clinical decision-making and future research. The study included 1264 patients, with 436 from a temporal-spatial cohort. LASSO was used to select predictive factors, and SMOTENC oversampling and algorithm tuning were applied. The models were evaluated using AUC, accuracy, F1 score, specificity, recall, and DCA. The results showed that 161 out of 1264 patients (12.73%) developed urinary retention postoperatively. LASSO regression identified 8 key predictive factors: age, menopausal status, surgical method, postoperative analgesia, anesthesia type, POP-Q, surgical time, and intraoperative blood loss. The model based on the GBDT algorithm performed the best, with an AUC of 0.997 for the training set, 0.927 for the test set, and 0.710 and 0.676 for the external temporal-spatial validation. SHAP analysis of the GBDT model revealed that surgical time was the most significant factor for predicting urinary retention, followed by intraoperative blood loss, surgical method, and age. The study demonstrates that machine learning methods have significant advantages in predicting the risk of postoperative urinary retention after gynecologic abdominal-pelvic surgery. SHAP analysis and the online calculator can assist clinicians in assessing high-risk patients, providing valuable foundations for early screening and intervention.

Indexed as

Gynecologic Surgical ProceduresPostoperative ComplicationsUrinary RetentionAbdomenAdultAgedAlgorithmsFemaleHumansMachine LearningMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsGynecologic surgeryMachine learningPredictive modelingRisk factorsUrinary retention

Identifiers

PMID41419556
PMCPMC12827410

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.