ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Explainable machine-learning model for postoperative lower-extremity deep vein thrombosis after gynecologic cancer surgery.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Postoperative lower-extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a common and potentially fatal complication after radical surgery for gynecologic malignancies, yet population-specific risk tools remain limited. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 500 consecutive patients who underwent radical surgery for cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer (January 2022-January 2025). The cohort was randomly divided into a training set (n=351, 70%) and a validation set (n=149, 30%) at a 7:3 ratio. Independent predictors were identified using logistic regression, and 10 machine-learning algorithms were trained and compared. Model discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility were evaluated, and the optimal model was interpreted using SHAP. Results: DVT occurred in 116 patients (23.2%). Five variables were independently associated with DVT: age, Caprini score, lymphocyte count, preoperative D-dimer, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR).Across candidate models, CatBoost achieved the optimal overall performance on the validation set, yielding an AUC of 0.816 (95% CI: 0.738-0.881), with sensitivity of 0.824 (95% CI: 0.700-1.000) and specificity of 0.730 (95% CI: 0.515-0.876), and SHAP analysis ranked the predictors by mean absolute SHAP value in the following order: lymphocyte count, Caprini score, age, preoperative D-dimer, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR). Conclusion: An interpretable CatBoost-based model enables individualized postoperative DVT risk stratification after gynecologic cancer surgery and may support targeted, evidence-based thromboprophylaxis and perioperative nursing management.
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.