ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Dynamic risk prediction of physical fitness failure in college students: a four-year longitudinal landmark supermodel study.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To develop and validate a dynamic risk prediction model (Landmark Supermodel) for identifying college students at risk of physical fitness failure by senior year, and to determine the optimal intervention window through sequential risk updating. Methods: A total of 4,006 college students (2,745 males; 1,261 females) with four-year longitudinal physical fitness test data were included. Ten physical fitness indicators were assessed annually. Sex-stratified Landmark Supermodels were constructed at three landmark time points using Random Forest and XGBoost classifiers with 57 engineered features encompassing static snapshots, cumulative summaries, change trajectories, variability, and interaction terms. Model performance was evaluated by AUC, Brier score, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis. Results: The Random Forest Landmark Supermodel achieved AUC of 0.842 (95% CI: 0.831-0.853) for males and 0.773 (95% CI: 0.737-0.818) for females. AUC improved from 0.751 (post-freshman) to 0.858 (post-sophomore) to 0.894 (post-junior) in males. At the junior-year landmark, risk stratification separated male students into high-risk (44.3% failure rate), medium-risk (6.7%), and low-risk (1.3%) groups. Vital capacity, endurance running performance, and BMI trajectories emerged as the most important predictive features. Conclusion: Dynamic landmark risk prediction can accurately identify students at risk of physical fitness failure, with the sophomore year representing the optimal intervention window. The model provides an evidence-based tool for individualized early warning in physical education.
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.