ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Development and external validation of a machine learning model for three-tier disability risk stratification in older adults.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Global aging has made disability among older adults a major public health challenge. Existing prediction models often lack external validation and actionable risk stratification. This study aims to develop and externally validate an explainable, three-tier machine learning framework for disability risk prediction and stratification among older adults. Methods: The training set and internal validation set were derived from the longitudinal development cohort of the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS, Results: LASSO regression identified seven critical predictors. The Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) achieved the optimal balance, achieving the optimal balance of predictive performance in the internal testing set (AUC = 0.737) and external validation cohort (AUC = 0.782). SHAP analysis revealed age, age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (ACCI), and lower limb mobility as the paramount global predictors. The established risk stratification thresholds (33.17 and 65.23%) successfully categorized older adults into three levels. This three-tier system exhibited a significant gradient increase in actual disability incidence within the external set ( Discussion: The XGBoost model showed satisfactory and consistent performance in external validation. SHAP provided clinically meaningful insights, emphasizing age, lower-limb mobility, psychological status, and comorbidity burden. The validated three-tier system bridges the translational gap between complex predicted probabilities and practical clinical decisions.
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.