ArticleBlood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue
Optimal model for predicting intraoperative blood transfusion in elective surgery patients: a comparative study of eight machine learning methods.
Article in Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unified comparison of machine learning paradigms for blood transfusion prediction in pediatric congenital heart surgery.iScience · 2026Article
- Multifaceted bioinformatic analysis uncover links m5C-related ferroptosis gene SLC2A1 to prognosis and immune infiltration in lung adenocarcinoma.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- AI-Driven Innovations in Transfusion Medicine: A Narrative Synthesis of Current Reviews.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Precision medicine and Patient Blood Management - A good pairing.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangueArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo identify the optimal machine learning model for predicting intraoperative blood transfusion requirements in elective surgery patients by systematically evaluating eight algorithms. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective cohort of 1,500 elective surgery patients was screened, with 1,017 meeting inclusion criteria. Demographic (gender, age, height, weight), preoperative (liver, cardiac, pulmonary, coagulation functions), and intraoperative indicators (surgery grade, anesthesia score, estimated blood loss, vital signs) were collected. After univariate analysis, 20 significant variables were selected for modeling. The dataset was split 7:3 into training and testing sets. Eight models -Random Forest (RF), Generalized Linear Model (GLM), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM), k-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), Neural Network (NNet), λ determined by cross-validation (LASSO), and Decision Tree (DT)- were trained using five-fold cross-validation. Performance was evaluated based on the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC), precision-recall curves (PR-AUC), residuals, and variable importance.
resultsIn the training set, RF achieved the highest AUC (1.000), followed by GBM (0.992) and SVM (0.987). In the testing set, RF maintained superior performance (AUC=0.992), with high precision-recall (AUC-PR=0.988) and minimal residuals. Key predictors included preoperative hemoglobin (preHGB), EBL, and coagulation markers (preAPTT, preDD). DISCUSSION: RF is the most reliable model for intraoperative transfusion prediction, offering high accuracy and clinical interpretability. This study provides a data-driven tool to optimize transfusion strategies and reduce adverse 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.