Table 3.
Author, year | Country | Study design | Type of procedure | Main outcomes | Objective | Final Cohort | Type of AI | Prediction Performance | External validation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zhang F. J Healthc Eng. 2021. | China | Observational, retrospective, monocentric study | Elective urologic surgeries | Risk of surgeries cancellation | Identification of surgeries with high cancellation risk | 5 125 cases | Random Forest, logistic regression, XGBoost-tree, support vector machine-linear, and neural networks. | The average AUCs in the test set exceeded 0.65, with the maximum of AUC (0.7199, RF, original sampling, and backward selection strategy). | No |
Luo L. Health Informatics J. 2020 Mar. | China | Observational, retrospective, monocentric study | Elective urologic surgeries | Risk of surgeries cancellation | Identification of surgeries with high risks of cancellation | 5 125 cases | Random Forest, XGBoost linear and tree, SVM linear and radial. | The optimal performances of the identification models were as follows: sensitivity − 0.615; specificity − 0.957; positive predictive value − 0.454; negative predictive value − 0.904; accuracy − 0.647; and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve − 0.682. The random forest model achieved the best performance. | No |
AUC: Area under the Curve. RF: Random Forest. SVM: Support Vector Machine