ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Prediction of mortality risk in patients with peripheral artery disease using interpretable machine learning.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) face high postoperative mortality risks, necessitating precise risk stratification. While machine learning offers superior performance, its black-box nature limits clinical utility, and the prognostic value of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) remains controversial. Methods: A total of 610 surgically managed PAD patients were enrolled (median follow-up: 4 years) and randomly split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Six machine learning algorithms were constructed and optimized. Model performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and decision curve analysis (DCA). The sHapley additive exPlanations (SHAP) were employed for model interpretation and visualizing nonlinear relationships. Results: The random forest model achieved optimal performance (test set AUC = 0.814) with significant clinical net benefit. SHAP analysis identified age, prothrombin activity, and Rutherford classification as top predictors. Notably, while multivariate Cox regression failed to identify NLR as a linear predictor, SHAP dependence plots revealed a distinct nonlinear pattern: risk contribution increased sharply at low standardized NLR values before plateauing. Conclusion: We established an interpretable random forest model for predicting postoperative mortality in PAD. By integrating SHAP analysis, this study validates the nonlinear prognostic significance of NLR and demonstrates how explainable ML can complement traditional statistics for individualized risk assessment.
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.