Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41446343›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Physical activity trends as predictors of postoperative complications in oncology patients: A machine learning approach.

Carlos de Miguel Llorente, Sjoerd de Vries, Petra Bor, Laura Veerhoek, Jan Willem Van de Berg, Richard Meijer, Cindy Veenhof, Karin Valkenet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

8 authors.

Carlos de Miguel LlorenteDepartment of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Science and Sport, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1196-276X
Sjoerd de VriesDepartment of Digital Health, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5306-6797
Petra BorDepartment of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Science and Sport, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8494-349X
Laura VeerhoekDepartment of Digital Health, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jan Willem Van de BergDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Richard MeijerDepartment of Oncological Urology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Cindy VeenhofDepartment of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Science and Sport, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0970-2896
Karin ValkenetDepartment of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Science and Sport, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4715-685X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Early detection of postsurgical complications is critical for improving surgical outcomes, yet current monitoring methods are invasive, time-consuming, and may delay intervention. Advances in machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) enable using real-time data, such as accelerometer-derived physical activity, as potential early warning signs. This exploratory study evaluated whether activity trends can predict postsurgical complications in oncology patients using ML models. Methods: Usual care data from a surgical oncology ward (October 2020-December 2024) were analyzed. Three classifiers were evaluated-Random Forest (RF), eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGB), and Logistic Regression (LR)-within a nested cross-validation framework. Two modeling strategies were compared: (1) training/testing without undersampling and (2) training with undersampling at varying factors to balance complication versus noncomplication days. Models were assessed for next-day complication prediction using area under the ROC curve (AUC), precision, recall, and F1-score with bootstrap confidence intervals. Results: Data were collected from 965 patients, of whom 189 were included. The best performance for RF was observed at an undersampling factor of 1 (AUC = 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64-0.67; recall = 0.63, 95% CI 0.27-0.91; precision = 0.05, 95% CI 0.03-0.07). LR achieved its highest AUC without undersampling (0.68, 95% CI 0.67-0.69), while XGB performed consistently lower (AUC ≈ 0.63-0.64). Conclusions: This exploratory study showed that postoperative activity trends alone were insufficient to predict complications after major oncological surgery. Combining accelerometer, physiological, and laboratory data may improve predictive accuracy and overall clinical value in perioperative care.

Indexed as

machine learningoncologyphysical activityrehabilitationWearables

Identifiers

PMID41446343
PMCPMC12722666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.