ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2026
Frailty is Independently Associated with Stress Urinary Incontinence in Women: A SHAP-Enhanced Machine Learning Analysis.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThis study aimed to investigate the relationship between the Frailty Index (FI) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in women and to evaluate the impact of FI levels on SUI risk and the consistency of this relationship across different population characteristics.
methodsData were obtained from the NHANES 2005-2018 cycles. FI was assessed as a continuous, binary, and quartile variable. The outcome was stress urinary incontinence. Logistic regression models and restricted cubic spline analysis were used to examine associations between FI and SUI. Six machine learning models, such as Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM) and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), were developed using recursive feature elimination and cross-validation. Model performance was evaluated using area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration, and decision curve analysis. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values were used for model interpretation. All analyses were conducted using R and Python.
resultsA total of 19,633 participants were included, among whom 5681 reported SUI. Compared to non-SUI participants, those with SUI were older, had higher body mass index (BMI) and frailty scores, and had a higher prevalence of hysterectomy, vaginal delivery, diabetes, and hypertension. Frailty scores were significantly higher in the SUI group across all metrics-continuous, binary, and quartiles. Logistic regression analysis revealed a robust association between higher frailty levels and increased SUI risk, which remained significant after adjusting for covariates. Women categorized as frail (FI > 0.2) had a 2.23-fold higher odds of SUI in the unadjusted model, and the risk remained elevated in fully adjusted models. A restricted cubic spline analysis suggested a nonlinear association, with a steeper increase in SUI risk when frailty scores were below 14. In machine learning analyses, recursive feature elimination identified frailty score, BMI, poverty index, age, and alcohol use as the top predictors. LightGBM achieved the most stable performance across training and validation sets and was chosen for further interpretation. SHAP analysis confirmed frailty score as the most influential feature. Higher values of frailty score, age, and BMI were associated with increased SUI risk, with nonlinear patterns observed in SHAP dependence plots.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that elevated FI levels are independently associated with an increased risk of SUI in women and identifies FI as a key nonlinear predictor, underscoring its potential utility in early screening and risk assessment.
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.