The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Development and validation of an interpretable predictive machine learning model for successful weaning of continuous renal replacement therapy
Abstract
Continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) is a vital intervention for critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury, yet no standardized criteria exist to determine the optimal time for its discontinuation. We developed and validated machine learning models to predict successful CRRT weaning, defined as survival without any form of renal replacement therapy for at least seven days after discontinuation. This retrospective multicenter study used data from two French university hospitals and the publicly available MIMIC-IV critical care database. Predictive variables were selected from routinely collected clinical and biological data to ensure real-world applicability. Models were trained on the Rouen cohort and externally validated on the Rennes and MIMIC-IV cohorts. Among the tested algorithms, the random forest model achieved the best performance, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.82-0.91) in the training cohort, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.71-0.90) in the Rennes cohort, and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.65-0.78) in the MIMIC cohort. These results demonstrate the feasibility of a robust and interpretable prediction model that relies solely on routinely available data and has potential for integration into clinical workflows to support CRRT weaning decisions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso
Tibshirani, R. (1996) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1996.tb02080.x · Cited by 51,482
A New Equation to Estimate Glomerular Filtration Rate
Levey, A. S., Stevens, L. A., Schmid, C. H., Zhang, Y. (., Castro, A. F., Feldman, H. I., Kusek, J. W., Eggers, P., Van Lente, F., Greene, T., et al. (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-150-9-200905050-00006 · Cited by 25,603
KDIGO Clinical Practice Guidelines for Acute Kidney Injury
Khwaja, A. (2012) · Nephron Clinical Practice · doi:10.1159/000339789 · Cited by 8,014
Comparison of the predicted and observed secondary structure of T4 phage lysozyme
Matthews, B. W. (1975) · Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Protein Structure · doi:10.1016/0005-2795(75)90109-9 · Cited by 5,399
Collins, G. S., Moons, K. G. M., Dhiman, P., Riley, R. D., Beam, A. L., Van Calster, B., Ghassemi, M., Liu, X., Reitsma, J. B., van Smeden, M., et al. (2024) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-078378 · Cited by 4,718 · cited 1×
“This article follows the Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis – Artificial Intelligence (TRIPOD + AI) statement 36 ( Supplementary materials ).”
Uchino, S. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.294.7.813 · Cited by 4,176
MIMIC-IV, a freely accessible electronic health record dataset
Johnson, A. E. W., Bulgarelli, L., Shen, L., Gayles, A., Shammout, A., Horng, S., Pollard, T. J., Hao, S., Moody, B., Gow, B., et al. (2023) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/s41597-022-01899-x · Cited by 3,401
Rajpurkar, P., Chen, E., Banerjee, O., & Topol, E. J. (2022) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-021-01614-0 · Cited by 3,212
Global epidemiology and outcomes of acute kidney injury
Hoste, E. A. J., Kellum, J. A., Selby, N. M., Zarbock, A., Palevsky, P. M., Bagshaw, S. M., Goldstein, S. L., Cerdá, J., & Chawla, L. S. (2018) · Nature Reviews Nephrology · doi:10.1038/s41581-018-0052-0 · Cited by 1,486
Komorowski, M., Celi, L. A., Badawi, O., Gordon, A. C., & Faisal, A. A. (2018) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0213-5 · Cited by 1,290
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Rewa, O. G. et al. Epidemiology and outcomes of AKI treated with Continuous Kidney Replacement therapy: The Multicenter CRRTnet Study. Kidney Med. 5, 100641 (2023). · DOI
- Friedman, C. P. et al. The science of Learning Health Systems: Foundations for a new journal. Learning Health Syst. 1, e10020 (2017). · DOI
- Popoff, B. et al. How to accurately detect renal replacement therapy weaning in intensive care: Data quality and standardization considerations for the OMOP common data model. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 316, 1584–1588 (2024).
- Toulouse, E., Lafont, B., Granier, S., Mcgurk, G. & Bazin, J.-E. French legal approach to patient consent in clinical research. Anaesth. Crit. Care Pain Med. 39, 883–885 (2020).
- Fröhlich, S., Donnelly, A., Solymos, O. & Conlon, N. Use of 2-hour creatinine clearance to guide cessation of continuous renal replacement therapy. J. Crit. Care 27(744), e1-5 (2012).
- Madec, J. et al. eHOP Clinical Data Warehouse: From a Prototype to the Creation of an Inter-Regional Clinical Data Centers Network. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 264, 1536–1537 (2019).
- Yap, E. et al. The implication of dropping race from the MDRD equation to estimate GFR in an African American-Only Cohort. Int J Nephrol 2021, 1880499 (2021). · DOI
- Herm, L.-V., Heinrich, K., Wanner, J. & Janiesch, C. Stop ordering machine learning algorithms by their explainability! A user-centered investigation of performance and explainability. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 69, 102538 (2023).
Metadata
- Authors
- Popoff, B., Delange, B., Nicolas, J., Le Gall, A., Dahamna, B., Cuggia, M., Clavier, T., & Bouzillé, G.
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2025-11-28
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2045-2322
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 43
- Language
- en
- Licence
- creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (tdm)
- creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (vor)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Development and validation of an interpretable predictive machine learning model for successful weaning of continuous renal replacement therapy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41598-025-26774-8
- The paper
- Popoff, B., Delange, B., Nicolas, J., Le Gall, A., Dahamna, B., Cuggia, M., Clavier, T., & Bouzillé, G. (2025). Development and validation of an interpretable predictive machine learning model for successful weaning of continuous renal replacement therapy. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-26774-8
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
