ArticleNPJ Parkinson's disease2026
Machine learning prediction of discharge destination in patients with Parkinson's disease; a nationwide cohort study.
Article in NPJ Parkinson's disease, 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Risk stratification during hospitalization may support real-world discharge planning. We developed and validated machine learning models and an interpretable risk score to predict discharge destination among patients hospitalized with Parkinson's disease using a nationwide administrative claims database. Adults aged ≥50 years hospitalized between November 2017 and June 2023 were included, and the first hospitalization was defined as the index admission. Discharge destination was categorized as home, facility, or in-hospital death. The dataset was randomly divided into training (80%) and testing (20%) cohorts. Random forest models were constructed for all discharge outcomes, and an elastic net logistic regression model was developed for facility discharge. Among 281,664 index admissions, 48.0% were discharged home, 44.8% to a facility, and 7.2% died in hospital. The random forest models achieved AUCs of 0.775 for home discharge, 0.774 for facility discharge, and 0.832 for mortality. The elastic net model demonstrated an AUC of 0.752. A seven-item risk score identified a high-risk group with a 73.8% facility discharge rate compared with 40.6% in the low-risk group. These models provide clinically interpretable risk stratification to support multidisciplinary discharge planning.
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.