ArticleBMC surgery2026
Machine learning constructs a diagnostic prediction model for gangrenous perforation of acute appendicitis in elderly patients.
Article in BMC surgery, 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
Abstract
backgroundAs life expectancy rises and elderly populations grow, acute appendicitis incidence increases, often manifesting with nonspecific symptoms that challenge diagnosis. This study applied machine learning techniques to build a predictive model for gangrenous perforation, examining clinical features and risk factors in elderly patients with acute appendicitis.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis at The Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, China, from June 2021 to January 2024 (n = 251). Patients were classified into gangrenous perforation (n = 69) and non-gangrenous (n = 182) groups. For descriptive reporting, patients were randomly split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets (fixed seed); univariate comparisons and feature selection were restricted to the training set. Candidate predictors were selected by LASSO and further reduced by logistic regression. Model development and performance estimation used repeated nested cross-validation (outer 5-fold ×10 repeats; inner 5-fold; metric: AUC; seed = 123). LR_3var, XGBoost, SVM, and RF were evaluated using out-of-fold AUC, calibration, and decision curve analysis.
resultsLASSO retained nine candidates; logistic regression identified three final predictors (WBC, CRP, albumin). Mean outer-fold AUCs were 0.756 ± 0.080 (LR_3var), 0.757 ± 0.078 (XGBoost), 0.757 ± 0.081 (SVM_linear), and 0.728 ± 0.083 (RF). Multivariable models outperformed single predictors; calibration and decision curves indicated acceptable calibration and potential net benefit.
conclusionsUsing routine laboratory markers, multivariable models showed good discrimination for gangrenous perforation under repeated nested cross-validation. LR_3var was selected for nomogram-based risk stratification due to interpretability and practicality.
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.