SynthesisFrontiers in digital health2025
AI/ML driven prediction of COPD exacerbations and readmissions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamic prediction of adverse outcomes in discharged COPD patients using patient-reported outcomes.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Observational
- Mobile health for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a bibliometric analysis based on integrated databases (2000-2025).Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Development and External Validation of a Machine Learning Model for 90-Day Readmission in Hospitalized Older Patients with AECOPD: A Two-Center Study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations and hospital readmissions are major drivers of morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) approaches have been applied to predict these events, but their pooled performance and methodological rigor remain unclear. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of peer-reviewed studies developing or validating AI/ML models for predicting acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) or hospital readmissions. Databases (PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Cochrane Library, Semantic Scholar) were searched to 2025. Eligible designs included retrospective and prospective cohorts, randomized trials with embedded prediction, and case-control studies. Study quality was assessed using PROBAST, and evidence certainty with GRADE. Random-effects models pooled area under the ROC curve (AUC); subgroup analyses compared AECOPD vs. readmission outcomes and internal vs. external validation. Results: Thirteen studies were included, with sample sizes ranging from 110 to 113,786 patients. Most were retrospective cohorts using EHRs or claims data, while two used prospective or trial-based data. Models applied diverse algorithms, including random forests, gradient boosting, neural networks, and ensemble pipelines. The pooled AUC across all studies was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.74-0.80), with very high heterogeneity (I Conclusion: AI/ML models demonstrate moderate-to-high discriminatory accuracy in predicting COPD exacerbations and readmissions, with pooled AUCs of 0.73-0.77. However, high heterogeneity, limited external validation, and frequent methodological concerns restrict generalizability. Standardized reporting frameworks (TRIPOD-AI, PROBAST-AI), rigorous external validations, and prospective implementation studies are needed to translate these promising tools into clinical practice.
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.