ArticleBMC urology2026
Development of machine learning prediction models for postoperative outcomes in adult male circumcision.
Article in BMC urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMale circumcision is among the most commonly performed and clinically endorsed surgical procedures globally, deeply rooted in medical, cultural, and religious traditions. While circumcision confers well-documented health benefits such as reduced infection and inflammation, adult patients often experience variable outcomes related to anatomical variations and comorbidities, emphasizing the importance of optimizing procedural planning.
methodsThe objective of this study was to develop and internally validate prediction models for short-term postoperative complications following adult male circumcision. This retrospective study evaluated the ability of supervised machine learning models (logistic regression [LR], random forest [RF], and support vector machines [SVM]) to predict short-term postoperative complications following adult male circumcision, using procedural and intraoperative variables, including surgical modality (scalpel- and clamp-based (traditional) vs. laser-based), intraoperative blood loss, and operative technique. Data from 194 adult male patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent circumcision between 2023 and 2024 at a single clinical center in Milan, Italy, were analyzed. Models were trained using standardized preprocessing pipelines and evaluated via stratified 10-fold cross-validation using classification metrics, calibration curves, and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP)-based interpretability analysis.
resultsThe SVM model demonstrated superior predictive performance, achieving the highest area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic (AUC ROC) of 0.907, sensitivity of 0.862, average precision of 0.832, and the lowest Brier score of 0.105. SHAP analysis identified intraoperative blood loss and surgical technique as the strongest predictors of postoperative complications.
conclusionsThese findings support the clinical utility of interpretable machine learning models for individualized risk prediction in adult circumcision, guiding tailored preoperative decisions, particularly in high-risk or resource-limited clinical settings. Study strengths include rigorous evaluation and interpretability, while limitations encompass single-center data and the absence of external validation. Therefore, future research should assess generalizability across more diverse surgical populations and healthcare environments.
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.