ArticleEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2026
Predicting 30-day unplanned readmissions in patients with cancer in a Brazilian hospital: a Machine Learning approach.
Article in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 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
objectiveThis study aims to develop Machine Learning models to predict 30-day unplanned readmissions in cancer patients treated at a private hospital in Brazil.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included admission records of hospitalizations lasting >24 hours, with a corresponding diagnosis of a solid malignancy. The primary outcome was 30-day unplanned readmission. We tested five supervised Machine Learning algorithms to develop predictive models: a "48-hour" model, which used data from the first 48 hours after admission, and a "discharge" model, which used data from the entire hospitalization. The optimal models were selected based on their median performance (area under the ROC curve [AUC], precision, recall, F1, and Fβ-Score). Model explainability was assessed using SHAP scores (SS).
resultsWe analyzed 3,728 admissions from 1,573 cancer patients, with an unplanned 30-day readmission rate of 21.13%. The Random Forest algorithm demonstrated the best-balanced performance for the 48-hour model (AUC = 0.70, IQR= 0.68-0.71), whereas LightGBM performed best for the discharge model (AUC = 0.70, IQR= 0.68-0.72). In both models, the top predictor was prior emergency department visits in the past six months (SS=0.074 and 0.053, respectively). The top 10 predictors included: laboratory values (including lymphocyte count, Gamma-glutamyl transferase, Red Cell Distribution Width, hemoglobin, sodium, monocyte count, hematocrit, and urea), vital signs, and emergency index admission in both models, with colon cancer ranking among the top predictors in the 48-hour model.
conclusionThe models underscored the significance of prior emergency department visits, laboratory values, and vital signs as key predictors of 30-day unplanned readmission. The timing of laboratory and vitals influenced their predictive strength. Implementing these models could help providers develop personalized care strategies to reduce readmission risk. External validation is needed.
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.