ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
Prediction of death in burn patients infected with antibiotic-resistant Staphylococcus aureus using machine learning based techniques.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Infections in Burn Patients: Pathophysiology, Prevention, and Contemporary Therapeutic Strategies in the Era of Antimicrobial Resistance.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBurn injuries are a major cause of death, and infections with antibiotic‑resistant Staphylococcus aureus further increase mortality in these patients. There is a need for accurate and interpretable tools to predict the risk of death in this high‑risk group. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included 222 burn patients with confirmed antibiotic‑resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections admitted to Velayat center between 2021 and 2023. Clinical and demographic data (age, total body surface area burned, length of hospital stay, sex, ventilation, inhalation injury, underlying diseases, and outcome) were collected. Seven machine learning models (XGBoost, Random Forest, Naïve Bayes, Logistic Regression, SVM, KNN, and Decision Tree) were developed and tuned using 5‑fold cross‑validation, then evaluated in an independent validation set using AUC, accuracy, precision, recall, and F1‑score, with additional 10‑fold cross‑validation. Model interpretability was assessed using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP).
resultsThe mean age of patients was 39.91 ± 14.39 years. Non‑survivors had larger burned areas and shorter hospital stays than survivors. Among the seven models, XGBoost achieved the best performance, with an AUC of 0.8704 and an accuracy of 0.8889 in the validation set. SHAP analysis identified total body surface area, inhalation injury, age, hospital stay, underlying disease, and ventilation as the main predictors of in‑hospital mortality and provided individualized explanations of predictions.
conclusionThis study introduces an interpretable XGBoost‑based model for predicting in‑hospital mortality in burn patients with antibiotic‑resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in Northern Iran. The model’s strong performance and explainability suggest that it can complement traditional scoring systems and help clinicians make transparent, patient‑specific decisions in similar settings.
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.