Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41421980›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025

Leveraging laboratory biomarkers to predict urosepsis after upper urinary tract stone surgery: an explainable machine learning approach.

Zuheng Wang, Xiao Li, Qin Li, Rongbin Zhou, Dongwei Pan, Zequn Su, Cunmeng Wei, Wenhao Lu, Fubo Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Zuheng Wang *Center for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi key Laboratory for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi Collaborative Innovation Center for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, University Engineering Research Center of Digital Medicine and Healthcare, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi, China.
Xiao Li *Center for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi key Laboratory for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi Collaborative Innovation Center for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, University Engineering Research Center of Digital Medicine and Healthcare, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi, China.
Qin Li *Department of Hematology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi, China.
Rongbin ZhouCenter for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi key Laboratory for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi Collaborative Innovation Center for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, University Engineering Research Center of Digital Medicine and Healthcare, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi, China.
Dongwei PanDepartment of Urology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou, 362000, China.
Zequn SuCenter for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi key Laboratory for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi Collaborative Innovation Center for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, University Engineering Research Center of Digital Medicine and Healthcare, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi, China.
Cunmeng WeiCenter for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi key Laboratory for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi Collaborative Innovation Center for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, University Engineering Research Center of Digital Medicine and Healthcare, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi, China. weichunmeng@stu.gxmu.edu.cn.
Wenhao LuCenter for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi key Laboratory for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi Collaborative Innovation Center for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, University Engineering Research Center of Digital Medicine and Healthcare, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi, China. lwh950316@126.com.
Fubo WangCenter for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi key Laboratory for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, Guangxi Collaborative Innovation Center for Genomic and Personalized Medicine, University Engineering Research Center of Digital Medicine and Healthcare, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi, China. wangfubo@gxmu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveUrosepsis is a leading cause of perioperative mortality after upper urinary tract stone surgery. This study aimed to develop a simple and accurate predictive model for postoperative sepsis by integrating laboratory parameters using machine learning (ML) and the Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) algorithm.

methodsData from 7,464 patients were analyzed, including 155 pre- and postoperative features. Key variables were selected using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression and correlation analysis. Eight ML algorithms were employed to develop the predictive model using 10-fold cross-validation. The model’s performance was assessed using Receiver Operating Characteristic curve, learning curve, calibration plot, and decision curve. The SHAP algorithm was employed to analyze variable importance. Finally, the model was converted into a publicly accessible application.

results116 out of 155 variables (74.84%) differed significantly between the urosepsis (n = 622, 8.33%) and non-urosepsis groups (n = 6,842, 91.67%). LASSO regression identified eight predictive variables: postoperative IL-6, SAA, PCT/ALB, NLPR, PT, ALB, HCT, and neutrophil. Light Gradient Boosting Machine achieved the best performance, with AUCs of 1.0, 0.90, and 0.88 for the training, validation, and test cohorts, respectively. A good model fit, strong calibration, and positive clinical utility were confirmed by the learning curve, calibration plot, and decision curve. Postoperative PCT/ALB, neutrophil, IL-6, ALB, and PT were identified as key predictors by the SHAP algorithm. A publicly accessible web application was developed to facilitate both patients and physicians (https://www.xsmartanalysis.com/model/list/predict/model/html?mid=29648&symbol=71lphm763138mj895nd8).

conclusionsA robust, interpretable model based on postoperative laboratory biomarkers was successfully developed and validated. This model exhibits excellent predictive performance and clinical utility, and the integration of SHAP analysis provides transparent insights into the key drivers of urosepsis, offering a practical tool for early risk stratification and personalized intervention in clinical practice.

trial registrationProspective registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (trial registration number: ChiCTR2400079409, date of registration: 2024-01-03). CLINICAL

trial registrationThis study was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on January 3, 2024 (ChiCTR2400079409, http://www.chictr.org.cn/ ).

Indexed as

BiomarkersMachine LearningPostoperative ComplicationsSepsisUrinary CalculiUrinary Tract InfectionsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Learning ModelsBiomarkersArtificial intelligenceCalculiMachine learningPercutaneous nephrolithotomyRetrograde intrarenal surgeryUrosepsis

Identifiers

PMID41421980
PMCPMC12838489

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.