Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background Older adults undergoing surgery for intertrochanteric fractures are vulnerable to early perioperative metabolic disturbances. We evaluated preoperative machine-learning models and compared them with single-predictor and conventional regression benchmarks for new-onset hypocalcemia within 48 h after surgery. Methods This single-center retrospective study included 332 patients aged ≥65 years with preoperative corrected calcium concentrations ≥2.15 mmol/L. Hypocalcemia was defined as an albumin-corrected calcium concentration <2.15 mmol/L. The primary analysis used Boruta feature selection and stratified five-fold outer cross-validation repeated five times, with four-fold inner cross-validation for hyperparameter tuning by AUROC. Imputation, preprocessing, feature selection, and tuning were repeated within each outer training fold. Models were compared using patient-level repeated out-of-fold predictions. Results New-onset hypocalcemia occurred in 92 patients (27.7%). The out-of-fold AUROCs were 0.639 for corrected calcium alone, 0.615 for albumin alone, and 0.442 for measured total calcium alone, compared with 0.670 for conventional logistic regression, 0.671 for a generalized additive model, and 0.6829 (95% CI: 0.6177–0.7407) for Stable Kernel Naive Bayes. The AUROC difference between Stable Kernel Naive Bayes and corrected calcium alone was 0.044 (95% CI: −0.022 to 0.105). Stable Kernel Naive Bayes had a PR-AUC of 0.4276 (95% CI: 0.3401–0.5337) and a Brier score of 0.1853 (95% CI: 0.1631–0.2078). Corrected calcium was selected in all 25 outer training folds. Chronological evaluation using 2015–2022 for development and 2023–2025 for evaluation yielded an AUROC of 0.7083 (95% CI: 0.5957–0.8210). Conclusion Preoperative corrected calcium captured much of the available predictive information. Multivariable models showed modest discrimination, without a clear incremental advantage over corrected calcium alone. The findings support further evaluation of preoperative risk stratification; effects on monitoring and patient outcomes require prospective assessment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: