ArticleAging clinical and experimental research2025
Phenotyping to predict 12-month health outcomes of older general medicine patients.
Article in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA variety of unsupervised learning algorithms have been used to phenotype older patients, enabling directed care and personalised treatment plans. However, the ability of the clusters to accurately discriminate for the risk of older patients, may vary depending on the methods employed.
aimsTo compare seven clustering algorithms in their ability to develop patient phenotypes that accurately predict health outcomes.
methodsData was collected for N = 737 older medical inpatients during their hospital stay for five different types of medical data (ICD-10 codes, ATC drug codes, laboratory, clinic and frailty data). We trialled five unsupervised learning algorithms (K-means, K-modes, hierarchical clustering, latent class analysis (LCA), and DBSCAN) and two graph-based approaches to create separate clusters for each method and datatype. These were used as input for a random forest classifier to predict eleven health outcomes: mortality at one, three, six and 12 months, in-hospital falls and delirium, length-of-stay, outpatient visits, and readmissions at one, three and six months.
resultsThe overall median area-under-the-curve (AUC) across the eleven outcomes for the seven methods were (from highest to lowest) 0.758 (hierarchical), 0.739 (K-means), 0.722 (KG-Louvain), 0.704 (KNN-Louvain), 0.698 (LCA), 0.694 (DBSCAN) and 0.656 (K-modes). Overall, frailty data was most important data type for predicting mortality, ICD-10 disease codes for predicting readmissions, and laboratory data the most important for predicting falls.
conclusionsClusters created using hierarchical, K-means and Louvain community detection algorithms identified well-separated patient phenotypes that were consistently associated with age-related adverse health outcomes. Frailty data was the most valuable data type for predicting most health outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.