Author
Listed:
- Kristian F Axelsson
- Henrik Litsne
- Konstantinos Konstantinou
- Hussnain Khalid
- Aldina Pivodic
- Mattias Lorentzon
Abstract
Background: Although hip fractures are commonly associated with functional decline, increased morbidity, and mortality, accurate models for both short- and long-term prediction that do not rely on in-person assessment remain lacking. The aim was to develop and validate a high-performing clinical decision support tool, that can be used for population screening without the need for patient assessment, for predicting hip fracture risk. Methods and findings: All individuals aged ≥50 years living in Sweden at baseline (randomly set between 2011 and 2013, N = 3,542,647), who had not been prescribed osteoporosis medication within the previous 2 years, were included and followed through the end of 2021. During follow-up, 142,327 individuals sustained a hip fracture. Using a broad unconditional approach, 139,980 variables encompassing diagnoses, medications, procedures, demographics and socioeconomic data with multiple historic windows and level of detail were defined. The dataset was divided into discovery (25%), development (65%) and holdout (10%) cohorts. The risk of hip fracture was evaluated using traditional Cox models, as well as machine learning methods XGBoost and DeepSurv. The developed clinical support tool FRACTURE-ML based on DeepSurv using 2,500 predictors yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.89 (95% CI 0.88, 0.89) at year 1, 0.88 (95% CI 0.87,0.88) at two years, and a reduced model with 35 predictors yielded similar AUCs, 0.87 at 2 years and 0.85 at 5 years. Traditional Cox models with 35 and 400 predictors reached similar AUCs. Both the DeepSurv and the Cox models performed excellently at the individual level based on calibration plot analysis. Screening using the in Sweden advocated fracture liaison services (FLS) secondary prevention approach (recent fracture), resulted in an AUC of 0.55 (95% CI 0.54, 0.55) at two years. For 2-year prediction, FRACTURE-ML, which could be used as a complementary approach for primary prevention, identified nearly seven times more persons at risk (sensitivity 0.84 (95% CI 0.82, 0.85) versus 0.12 (95% CI 0.11, 0.13) than the FLS approach, with limited reduction in specificity (0.79 (95% CI 0.79, 0.79) versus 0.98 (95% CI 0.98, 0.98), respectively). The lack of external validation and implementation studies represents a limitation, as such studies are needed to establish the clinical usefulness of FRACTURE-ML. Conclusions: FRACTURE-ML was effective in predicting hip fracture and could be used as a resource-efficient solution for population screening to improve the prevention of hip fracture. Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?: In this nationwide cohort study, Kristian F. Axelsson and colleagues develop and validate clinical decision support tool for predicting hip fracture risk that can be used for population screening without the need for patient assessment.
Suggested Citation
Kristian F Axelsson & Henrik Litsne & Konstantinos Konstantinou & Hussnain Khalid & Aldina Pivodic & Mattias Lorentzon, 2026.
"A clinical decision support tool for accurate hip fracture prediction: A nationwide cohort study,"
PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 23(8), pages 1-16, August.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pmed00:1005190
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1005190
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1005190. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.