Full Oral

Aim: Multiple clinical risk scores have been developed for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) with limited sensitivity and specificity.We aim to develop a machine learning model to identify high risk AUGIB patients associated with poor outcomes and to compare its performance with existing risk scores.Methods: A population-wide database was developed with all AUGIB patients in 6 major hospitals in Hong Kong.The study endpoint is a composite endpoint of poor outcomes including mortality (all-cause mortality and bleeding-related mortality), rebleeding within 30 days, need for ICU, re-endoscopy, surgery and embolization.15 factors were included.Machine learningbased predictive models were developed to estimate the probability of poor outcomes in patients with AUGIB.Several machine learning algorithms (decision trees, random forests, support vector machines and gradient boosting machines [GBM]) were trained.Model performance was assessed using AUROC, sensitivity and specificity.The results were validated with a 10-fold split and cross validation.Results: 6503 AUGIB patients were included, in whom 1500 patients were with poor outcomes.The AUROC, sensitivity and specificity of the model with GBM were 0.9233, 0.8313 and 0.8563, respectively.Moreover, the GBM model outperforms the existing clinical risk scores in terms of the AUROC, F1 score and specificity of GBM.The AUROC, F1, sensitivity, specificity of GBS ≥ 12 and Rockall Score ≥ 4 were 0.751, 0.497, 0.588, 0.747 and 0.714, 0.483, 0.744, 0.565, respectively.Conclusion: GBM model outperforms other clinical risk scores.This new model may replace existing clinical risk scores with higher accuracy.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Surgical Practice
Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-1633.70105
Type
article
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Full Oral

Multiple clinical risk scores have been developed for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) with limited sensitivity and specificity. We aim to develop a machine learning model to identify high risk AUGIB patients associated with poor outcomes and to compare its performance with existing risk scores.
3 links
Surgical Practice
article

Full Oral

Multiple clinical risk scores have been developed for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) with limited sensitivity and specificity. We aim to develop a machine learning model to identify high risk AUGIB patients associated with poor outcomes and to compare its performance with existing risk scores.
article en

Abstract

Aim: Multiple clinical risk scores have been developed for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) with limited sensitivity and specificity.We aim to develop a machine learning model to identify high risk AUGIB patients associated with poor outcomes and to compare its performance with existing risk scores.Methods: A population-wide database was developed with all AUGIB patients in 6 major hospitals in Hong Kong.The study endpoint is a composite endpoint of poor outcomes including mortality (all-cause mortality and bleeding-related mortality), rebleeding within 30 days, need for ICU, re-endoscopy, surgery and embolization.15 factors were included.Machine learningbased predictive models were developed to estimate the probability of poor outcomes in patients with AUGIB.Several machine learning algorithms (decision trees, random forests, support vector machines and gradient boosting machines [GBM]) were trained.Model performance was assessed using AUROC, sensitivity and specificity.The results were validated with a 10-fold split and cross validation.Results: 6503 AUGIB patients were included, in whom 1500 patients were with poor outcomes.The AUROC, sensitivity and specificity of the model with GBM were 0.9233, 0.8313 and 0.8563, respectively.Moreover, the GBM model outperforms the existing clinical risk scores in terms of the AUROC, F1 score and specificity of GBM.The AUROC, F1, sensitivity, specificity of GBS ≥ 12 and Rockall Score ≥ 4 were 0.751, 0.497, 0.588, 0.747 and 0.714, 0.483, 0.744, 0.565, respectively.Conclusion: GBM model outperforms other clinical risk scores.This new model may replace existing clinical risk scores with higher accuracy.

Surgical PracticeVol. 30(S1)
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon