ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
A multicenter explainable machine learning analysis of autoimmune disease comorbidity in ankylosing spondylitis.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) frequently coexists with other autoimmune diseases, leading to increased clinical heterogeneity and diagnostic complexity. Early identification of autoimmune comorbidity in AS remains challenging in routine practice. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective, cross-sectional study was conducted, where clinical and laboratory data were collected from three independent tertiary centers between 2012 and 2025. Patients were classified into three groups: AS alone, autoimmune diseases alone, and AS with autoimmune comorbidities. Routinely available variables, including demographic characteristics, systemic inflammatory indices, hematological parameters, and liver and renal function markers, were analyzed. Multiple machine learning algorithms were developed for two clinically relevant classification tasks: AS alone vs. AS with autoimmune comorbidities, and autoimmune diseases alone vs. AS with autoimmune comorbidities. Model performance was evaluated using AUC, calibration, decision curve analysis, and clinical impact curves. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) were applied to enhance interpretability. Results: Among all models, LightGBM consistently demonstrated superior and stable performance across discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility metrics. In distinguishing AS alone from AS with autoimmune comorbidities, key contributors included age, gender, renal function-related markers (eGFR, CysC, BUN, UA), and protein and hepatobiliary indices (ALB, DBIL). In comparisons between autoimmune diseases alone and AS with autoimmune comorbidities, SHAP highlighted metabolic- and synthesis-related features (GLOB, PREALB, CHE, ALP), acid-base balance (HCO Conclusions: Using routinely available clinical data, an explainable machine learning framework enables accurate identification and characterization of autoimmune comorbidity in AS. This approach has practical potential for early risk stratification and clinical decision support in real-world settings.
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.