ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for postoperative atrial fibrillation after lung cancer surgery: a machine-learning-based study.
Article in Frontiers in 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is a common complication after lung cancer surgery, associated with increased morbidity and prolonged hospitalisation. Accurate preoperative or early postoperative risk stratification remains challenging due to the multifactorial nature of POAF. This study aimed to develop and validate machine learning-based prediction models for POAF and to construct a clinically applicable nomogram for individualised risk estimation. Methods: A total of 540 patients undergoing lung cancer surgery were retrospectively included, among whom 107 (19.8%) developed POAF. Patients were randomly divided into a training cohort ( Results: LASSO regression identified six predictors of POAF: age, education level, hypertension, marital status, postoperative pain score, and surgical approach. In the training cohort, all models demonstrated good discrimination with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values ranging from 0.827 to 0.995. However, performance declined to varying degrees in the test cohort. LR exhibited the most stable performance, achieving the highest AUC (0.855) and accuracy (0.857), with acceptable precision (0.667), recall (0.563), and F1 score (0.610). Calibration curves indicated good agreement between predicted and observed POAF risks for the LR model, while decision curve analysis demonstrated a consistently favourable net benefit across clinically relevant threshold probabilities. Based on these findings, an LR-based nomogram incorporating the six selected predictors was developed to facilitate individualised POAF risk prediction. Conclusions: We developed and internally validated a machine learning-assisted risk prediction framework for POAF after lung cancer surgery. Compared with more complex models, LR demonstrated superior stability, calibration, and clinical utility. The resulting nomogram provides a practical and interpretable tool for early postoperative POAF risk assessment and may support perioperative monitoring and personalised management of patients undergoing lung cancer surgery.
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.