ArticleScientific reports2026
Investigation of the multifactorial regulatory mechanisms underlying compositional changes in recurrent urinary stones and development of a machine learning-based personalized predictive model.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To characterize compositional changes in recurrent urinary calculi, identify associated factors, and develop/validate a prediction model to support risk assessment and individualized prevention. A retrospective cohort compared initial vs. recurrent stone composition and transformation patterns. Patients were classified as composition-unchanged (n = 113) or composition-changed (n = 89). Group differences were tested, and predictors were selected using univariate analysis, multivariate logistic regression, and LASSO. Nine machine-learning classifiers were trained and evaluated by AUC/accuracy, with model assessment using calibration, decision curve analysis (DCA), and SHAP. Calcium oxalate stones increased by 12.4% at recurrence, while infectious, uric acid, and other stones decreased by 5.5%, 5.9%, and 0.7% (P > 0.05). Infectious stones exhibited the highest transformation: only 3.2% remained unchanged, with 45.2% converting to calcium oxalate and 46.8% to uric acid stones. Compared with the changed group, the unchanged group was older and had a higher initial uric acid stone proportion and coronary heart disease prevalence; the changed group had a higher initial calcium oxalate proportion and more hypomagnesemia (P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that age, initial stone composition, hypocitraturia, hypomagnesuria, and hypomagnesemia were independently associated with composition change, while hyperoxaluria and hyperlipidemia were inversely associated (all P < 0.05). LASSO retained seven core variables. Among the tested models, Random Forest showed the highest performance (training AUC 0.978, accuracy 0.979; test AUC 0.882, accuracy 0.847), with acceptable calibration; DCA suggested a net benefit > 0.6 across thresholds 0.2–0.6. SHAP ranked hyperoxaluria, initial composition, and age as the top contributors. In this cohort, recurrent stone composition change was associated with multiple metabolic and clinical factors, with hypocitraturia, hypomagnesuria, and hypomagnesemia showing independent associations. Among the evaluated algorithms, the Random Forest model achieved the highest performance metrics, and SHAP was used to describe the relative contribution of key variables. Given that this study is a single-center retrospective cohort with a limited sample size, the derived model may exhibit optimistic bias. Its robustness and generalizability therefore require further validation in larger-scale and external multi-center cohorts.
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.