ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2026
Development and Validation of an Explainable Machine Learning Model for Prediction of Massive Transfusion in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.
Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Single cell transcriptomic analysis reveals pathogenic cell heterogeneity and candidate inflammatory-associated markers in STZ-induced diabetic mouse retina.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- "Age is associated with Achilles tendon thickness in older adults: an ultrasound case-control study with intra-observer reliability".Frontiers in physiology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a medical emergency with high mortality, especially when massive transfusion (MT) is required. Traditional scores like Glasgow-Blatchford provide moderate accuracy but overlook complex variable interactions. We developed and validated an explainable machine learning (ML) model for MT prediction in UGIB, improving precision and interpretability. Methods: In this retrospective study, 700 UGIB patients from The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University (2021-2025) were divided into training (n=490) and testing (n=210) cohorts. An external validation cohort (n=300) was sourced from The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University. From 18 clinical variables, 8 key features were selected using Boruta and LASSO regression. Seven ML algorithms were compared to identify the optimal model, which was then evaluated for discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) provided interpretability. Results: The Random Forest (RF) model achieved superior performance with an AUC of 0.862 (95% CI 0.785-0.939) in training, 0.823 (95% CI 0.768-0.879) in testing, and 0.807 (95% CI 0.748-0.866) in external validation. Calibration plots showed strong agreement between predicted and observed probabilities. Decision curve analysis indicated higher net benefit than "treat all" or "treat none" strategies. SHAP analysis ranked impaired mental status, liver cirrhosis, and international normalized ratio (INR) as top predictors, aligning with clinical intuition. Conclusion: The developed machine learning model demonstrated promising performance in identifying UGIB patients at high risk of massive transfusion. While the model shows potential to assist clinicians in optimizing blood management strategies, further prospective validation is required to confirm its clinical utility in diverse 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.