ArticleBJUI compass2026
Identifying recurrent stone formers with machine learning: A single-centre observational study.
Article in BJUI compass, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Kidney stones affect 12% of the population over their lifetime. Recurrent kidney stones lead to repeated interventions and excessive healthcare costs. Despite progress in imaging and metabolic evaluations, models to accurately identify patients at high risk are missing. In this study, we investigate whether machine learning methods can facilitate early identification of recurrent kidney stone formers. Patients and Methods: This observational study included data from the single-centric Bern Kidney Stone Registry. Each participant had at least one stone episode. Different data imputation techniques, such as kernel density estimation (KDE) imputation, median imputation and Results: A total of 706 patients (median age, 47, 71.2% male) were included, and 563 (79.7%) had recurrent stone events. The median imputation yielded the best-performing models. A mean receiver operating characteristic curve area under the curve (AUC) of 0.71 ± 0.03 was achieved on the held-out test set. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.42-0.49), age at first stone episode (OR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.46-0.56), oxalate (OR = 1.83, 95% CI: 1.43-2.23) and pH (OR = 1.74, 95% CI: 1.47-1.89) were among the most descriptive features. Conclusion: Routinely collected clinical and laboratory variables can be potentially exploited to identify recurrent stone formers, and our machine learning approach achieved better performance than previously reported work. With further validation on external datasets, our routine could support clinicians in designing dietary, medical or surveillance strategies, thereby reducing recurrence rates and improving long-term outcomes for patients with stone-forming conditions.
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.