ArticleGastro hep advances2026
A Clustering-Based Machine Learning Approach for Mortality Prediction in Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Development and Validation.
Article in Gastro hep advances, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a life-threatening emergency with considerable morbidity and mortality. Traditional risk scores like AIMS65 and Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS) are limited in capturing nonlinear clinical interactions. We developed and externally validated a machine learning model to predict 30-day mortality in GIB patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 5453 emergency department patients with GIB from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV-Emergency Department database for model development, with external validation using 7166 patients from Jefferson Health. Sixteen clinical and laboratory variables were selected based on a literature review and clinical relevance. The development cohort was divided into training (80%) and internal validation (20%) sets. Survivors were partitioned into 24 clusters using K-means, with separate random forest models trained on each cluster, combined with all deceased cases. Performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity on the external validation set, then benchmarked against AIMS65 and the GBS. Results: The model achieved an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.884 (95% confidence interval: 0.863-0.905) on internal validation and 0.882 (95% confidence interval: 0.863-0.900) on external validation, significantly outperforming AIMS65 (0.737) and GBS (0.768) ( Conclusion: Our model provides superior risk stratification for 30-day mortality in GIB compared to conventional scores, with validated generalizability and potential for integration into electronic health record systems.
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.