ArticleUrolithiasis2026
Explainable machine learning algorithms for preoperative risk stratification of urosepsis after retrograde intrarenal surgery.
Article in Urolithiasis, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Urosepsis is a severe infectious complication of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) that can progress to septic shock and become life-threatening. Early detection and prompt intervention are crucial for enhancing the prognosis of patients at risk for urosepsis. This study seeks to develop and verify a prediction model for post-RIRS urosepsis utilizing machine learning (ML) techniques. Electronic health record (EHR) data from 124 urosepsis patients and 1,786 non-urosepsis patients, all of whom had upper urinary tract stones and underwent RIRS, were analyzed. Participants were randomly allocated to a training cohort (80%) and a validation cohort (20%). Eight ML algorithms were employed to construct the models, including Gaussian Naive Bayes (GNB), Complement Naive Bayes, multilayer perceptron, AdaBoost, Gradient Boosting Decision Tree, logistic regression, LightGBM, and Random Forest. The predictive capability of each algorithm was evaluated by means of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Of the 78 clinical parameters collected, 41 were found to be statistically significant. Using LASSO regression, 7 variables were selected, including urine leukocytes (U-LEU), urine nitrite (U-NIT), urine pH, white blood cells (WBC), albumin (ALB), globulin (GLB), and alkaline phosphatase (ALP). Correlation analysis indicated no strong relationships among the parameters. GNB exhibited optimal performance in the validation cohort, achieving an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.58–0.89), with a sensitivity of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.58–0.76) and a specificity of 0.69 (95% CI: 0.64–0.73). The top five most important factors included U-NIT, GLB, ALP, WBC, and U-LEU. A ML model based on 7 clinical parameters was developed using EHR data, which aids in identifying high-risk urosepsis patients before RIRS. This approach provides a potentially valuable tool for preoperative urosepsis risk stratification of RIRS patients, facilitating the development of personalized clinical intervention strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42014538What 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.