ArticleScientific reports2026
Continuous predictive mortality risk monitoring after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation remains critical for treating high-risk hematological malignancies like leukemia. Despite advances in treatment, early mortality remains clinically significant, with approximately 6-11% of patients dying within the first 100 days after transplantation. This highlights the need for dynamic monitoring strategies beyond static pre-transplant risk assessments. This study introduces a novel, interpretable, real-time proof-of-concept monitoring framework that continuously assesses individualized mortality risk during treatment using routinely collected clinical data. The framework employs deep learning models to predict seven-day mortality risk based on 22 laboratory parameters from the previous 14 days and five demographic features. The framework incorporates an explainability method that provides time-resolved insights into predictions, which can be aggregated across time intervals or patient groups for broader interpretation. We evaluated the approach on data from 891 patients treated at the University Hospital of Düsseldorf (UKD; 2004-2019), as well as on an independent cohort derived from the MIMIC-IV database. Our experiments demonstrate that the predicted mortality risk aligns with observed outcomes, achieving a patient-level AUROC of 0.95 in the primary (UKD) cohort. Preliminary expert evaluation suggests that the predictions and explanations are intuitive and clinically relevant, supporting awareness of complications and highlighting potential for timely 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.