ArticleScientific reports2026
Building and validating machine learning models to predict appendiceal perforation during conservative treatment of fecalith-associated appendicitis: a 20-algorithm multicenter retrospective analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Fecalith-associated appendicitis presents unique challenges in conservative management due to increased perforation risk. Early identification of patients at high risk for appendiceal perforation during conservative treatment remains crucial for optimal clinical decision-making. To develop and validate machine learning-based prediction models for appendiceal perforation risk assessment during conservative treatment of fecalith-associated appendicitis. This retrospective cohort study analyzed 1247 patients with fecalith-associated appendicitis who underwent initial conservative treatment across four tertiary care centers between January 2018 and December 2023. The study design and reporting adhere to the TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis) guidelines for model development and external validation. Twenty machine learning algorithms were systematically trained and validated using clinical, laboratory, and imaging parameters. LASSO regularization identified eight optimal predictive features from 34 candidate variables. The final nominated model for clinical deployment is the Gradient Boosting classifier, trained on all eight LASSO-selected features. Primary outcome was appendiceal perforation within 72 h of conservative treatment initiation. Of 1247 patients, 186 (14.9%) developed appendiceal perforation during conservative treatment. The ensemble gradient boosting model achieved the highest performance with an AUC of 0.892 (95% CI 0.871-0.913), sensitivity of 84.4% (95% CI 79.2-89.6%), and specificity of 81.7% (95% CI 77.8-85.6%). External validation in an independent cohort (n = 225; The People's Hospital of Sishui, January 2023-December 2024) confirmed model generalisability: AUC = 0.909 (95% CI 0.859-0.951), sensitivity = 73.7%, specificity = 93.0%, PPV = 68.3%, and NPV = 94.6%. SHAP analysis identified key predictive features: fecalith size (importance: 0.234), C-reactive protein (0.186), white blood cell count (0.162), appendiceal wall thickness (0.143), and patient age (0.121). Risk stratification classified patients into low-risk (58.9%, 3.8% perforation rate), moderate-risk (31.9%, 24.6% perforation rate), and high-risk (9.2%, 71.3% perforation rate) categories. Decision curve analysis demonstrated significant clinical utility with net benefit of 0.08 at 15% threshold probability. Machine learning models, particularly ensemble gradient boosting methods, demonstrate excellent accuracy in predicting appendiceal perforation risk during conservative treatment of fecalith-associated appendicitis, with performance confirmed in an external validation cohort. These validated models provide clinically actionable risk stratification that may assist in treatment decision-making and patient monitoring strategies, potentially preventing unnecessary surgeries while identifying high-risk patients requiring enhanced surveillance or early surgical intervention.
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.