MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409026260 · doi:10.1016/j.artd.2025.101672

The Prediction of Venous Thromboembolism Using Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Lower Extremity Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

2025· review· en· W4409026260 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Davood Dalil, Sina Esmaeili, Ehsan Safaee, Nooshin Kejani

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroplasty Today · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVenous thromboembolismArthroplastySurgeryMachine learningComputer scienceThrombosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a common and serious complication following lower extremity arthroplasty, such as total hip and knee arthroplasty. Due to the increasing number of these surgeries, accurately predicting VTE risk is crucial. Traditional clinical prediction models often fall short due to their complexity and limited accuracy. Methods: This Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses-guided systematic review summarized the application of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning models in predicting VTE after total joint arthroplasty. Databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase were searched for relevant studies published up to January 2024. Eligible studies focused on the predictive accuracy of AI algorithms for VTE post arthroplasty and were assessed for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: A total of 7 retrospective cohort studies, encompassing 579,454 patients, met the inclusion criteria. These studies primarily employed the extreme gradient boosting model, which generally demonstrated strong predictive performance with area under the curve values ranging from 0.71 to 0.982. Models like random forest and support vector machines also performed well. However, only 1 study included external validation, critical for assessing generalizability. Conclusions: AI and machine learning models, particularly extreme gradient boosting, exhibit significant potential in predicting VTE after lower extremity arthroplasty, outperforming traditional clinical prediction tools. Yet, the need for external validation and high-quality, generalizable datasets remains critical before these models can be widely implemented in clinical practice. The study underscores the role of AI in preoperative planning to enhance patient outcomes in orthopaedic surgery.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroplasty TodaySame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207