Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42643899›Full record

ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2026

Machine Learning for Predicting 12-Month Survival after Liver Transplantation: Temporal Validation, Calibration, and Decision-Analytic Evaluation.

Jose Ricardo de Oliveira, Adriano Galindo Leal, Rodrigo Luiz Macacari, Ben-Hur Ferraz-Neto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational and structural biotechnology 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.

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

4 authors.

Jose Ricardo de OliveiraArtificial Intelligence and Analytics Department, Institute for Technological Research, São Paulo 05508-901, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5179-3544
Adriano Galindo LealArtificial Intelligence and Analytics Department, Institute for Technological Research, São Paulo 05508-901, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7114-6830
Rodrigo Luiz MacacariHospital das Clinicas (HCFMUSP), Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo 05403-010, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2131-7707
Ben-Hur Ferraz-NetoInstituto do Figado, Rede Américas, São Paulo 04534-011, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3667-9660

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate prediction of posttransplant survival is critical for optimizing liver allocation under organ scarcity. Although the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) is widely used for prioritization, it was not designed to estimate posttransplant outcomes, limiting its utility for individualized risk stratification. We developed and temporally validated machine-learning models to predict 12-month survival after liver transplantation using routinely collected donor-recipient variables from a real-world cohort. Sequential temporal validation was used to approximate prospective deployment. Performance was evaluated in terms of discrimination (receiver operating characteristic-area under the curve [ROC-AUC] and precision-recall area under the curve), calibration (Brier score), and decision-analytic evaluation using decision curve analysis. Class imbalance was addressed through cost-sensitive learning, and predicted probabilities were recalibrated with Platt scaling. Across temporal validation windows, discrimination remained modest, with ROC-AUC values below 0.70 and reaching 0.599 in the final window, reflecting the complexity of posttransplant outcomes in heterogeneous clinical populations. Calibration remained relatively stable (Brier score ≈ 0.18). Within the evaluated threshold range, the machine-learning models yielded a positive net benefit and generally exceeded the transformed MELD baseline in decision-analytic comparisons. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously given the modest discrimination and the exploratory nature of the MELD transformation used for cross-model comparison. Logistic regression provided the most consistent balance of discrimination, calibration, and net benefit. Overall, calibrated models with modest discrimination may still offer complementary risk information. However, further external validation, threshold-specific evaluation, and prospective testing are required before such models can be considered for operational decision support.

Identifiers

PMID42643899
PMCPMC13505570

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.