ArticleUrolithiasis2026
A computational model for predicting shock in patients at risk of urosepsis after urolithiasis surgery.
Article in Urolithiasis, 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.
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
Abstract
To develop and validate an artificial intelligence model for predicting septic shock risk in urosepsis patients following urolithiasis surgery.This retrospective study analyzed clinical data from 143 intensive care unit patients with postoperative urosepsis (39 with septic shock). Independent predictors were identified via multivariate logistic regression. Seven machine learning models were constructed and evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The optimal model was interpreted via SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations).Four independent predictors were identified: postoperative respiratory rate, procalcitonin, serum lactate, and bilirubin. The Artificial Neural Network (ANN) model demonstrated the best performance in the validation set (AUC: 0.950, accuracy: 0.889). It showed excellent calibration and clinical net benefit per DCA. An interpretable online dynamic nomogram was developed based on the ANN.An ANN model incorporating four postoperative variables effectively predicts septic shock risk in urosepsis patients, serving as a supplementary tool for early identification of high-risk individuals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41843149What 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.