ArticleJournal of inflammation research2026
Prediction of Imminent Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis Using Time-Updated Electronic Health Records and Machine Learning: A Temporal Validation Study.
Article in Journal of inflammation research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comment on: "Prediction of Imminent Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis Using Time-Updated Electronic Health Records and Machine Learning: A Temporal Validation Study" [Letter].Journal of inflammation research · 2026Article
- Current and Future Applications of AI-Driven Predictive Modeling and a Proposed Framework for AI-Bioprognostics in Kidney Care.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop and validate a robust machine learning (ML) model for the onset of peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis (PDAP) within three months using time-updated data from routine electronic health record (EHR). Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of 1143 unique continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) patients generating 25,710 quarterly assessments (patient-semesters) from 2017 to 2025 was randomly divided into training (n=8537 observations), internal validation (n=8538), and temporal validation (n=6635 observations, 2024-2025) sets. Thirty-one EHR variables were processed via low-variance filtering, correlation analysis, and Boruta selection. Nine ML models (including a Stacking ensemble model) were constructed with patient-level stratified 10-fold cross-validation, optimizing for recall to minimize missed diagnoses. The primary outcome was PDAP onset within three months after routine laboratory tests. Results: In internal validation cohort, the stacking model achieved good performance with area under the curve (AUC) of 0.811 (95% CI 0.792-0.830) and the highest recall of 0.794 (95% CI 0.769-0.819). In temporal validation cohort, it maintained robust good classification performance, achieving AUC of 0.795 (95% CI 0.771-0.819) and the highest recall of 0.833 (95% CI 0.792-0.874). The SHapley Additive exPlanation analysis identified several key features, supporting model interpretability and clinical utility for PDAP risk stratification. Conclusion: Integrating time-updated EHR data with ML enables robust and clinically actionable PDAP risk stratification, facilitating timely interventions to optimize CAPD patient management and reduce peritonitis-related complications.
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.