ArticleObesity surgery2026
Development of an Explainable Machine Learning Model for Predicting Reflux Esophagitis Among Candidates for Metabolic Bariatric Surgery.
Article in Obesity 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReflux esophagitis (RE) is a common gastroesophageal disorder among candidates for metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS). This study aimed to develop and internally validate an explainable machine learning (ML) model for predicting preoperative RE risk among patients undergoing MBS.
methodsThis retrospective study included 1,068 MBS candidates who were randomly divided into training and internal test cohorts (7:3). Feature selection was performed using correlation analysis, multicollinearity assessment, LASSO regression, and the Boruta algorithm. Six ML algorithms were developed and evaluated based on AUC, calibration, and classification metrics. SHAP analysis was used for model interpretation, and an online risk assessment tool was developed.
resultsAmong the 1,068 patients, 280 (26.2%) were diagnosed with RE. Six predictors were ultimately selected, including Sex, Hp, BMI, TG, HGB, and HC. Among the six ML algorithms, the XGB model demonstrated the best overall predictive performance, achieving AUC values of 0.881 and 0.825 in the training and internal test cohorts, respectively. SHAP analysis identified TG, BMI, Hp, HC, HGB, and Sex as the major contributors to model predictions. The online tool developed based on the final XGB model enabled individualized RE risk prediction.
conclusionsWe developed an explainable XGB model based on routinely available preoperative clinical variables to predict RE risk among MBS candidates. The model demonstrated acceptable predictive performance and interpretability and may assist in preoperative RE risk stratification and perioperative risk management. However, external validation in independent cohorts is required to further evaluate its robustness and generalizability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42749950What 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.