Next Article in Journal
Italian Evidence-Based Clinical Recommendations on the Appropriateness of Prescriptions and Diagnostic Tests in Pediatric Allergology: Focus on Anaphylaxis, Drug Allergy and Hymenoptera Venom Allergy
Previous Article in Journal
Temporal Cardiorenal Dynamics and Mortality Prediction After TAVR: The Prognostic Value of the 48–72 h BUN/EF Ratio
Previous Article in Special Issue
Decortication in the Surgical Management of Complete Atypical Femoral Fractures: A Strategy to Accelerate Fracture Healing
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

Stability-Driven Osteoporosis Screening: Multi-View Consensus Feature Selection with External Validation and Sensitivity Analysis

by
Waragunt Woratamrongpatai
1,
Watcharaporn Cholamjiak
2,
Nontawat Eiamniran
2 and
Phatcharapon Udomluck
1,*
1
School of Medicine, University of Phayao, Phayao 56000, Thailand
2
School of Science, University of Phayao, Phayao 56000, Thailand
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2026, 15(2), 677; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15020677 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 24 November 2025 / Revised: 5 January 2026 / Accepted: 8 January 2026 / Published: 14 January 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Accelerating Fracture Healing: Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment)

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Osteoporosis is a major global health concern, and early risk assessment plays a crucial role in fracture prevention. Although demographic, clinical, and lifestyle factors are commonly incorporated into screening tools, their relative importance within data-driven prediction frameworks can vary substantially across datasets. Rather than aiming to identify novel predictors, this study evaluates the stability and behavior of established osteoporosis risk factors using statistical inference and machine learning-based feature selection methods across heterogeneous data sources. We further examine whether simplified and near-minimal models can achieve predictive performances comparable to that of full-feature configurations. Methods: An open-access Kaggle dataset (n = 1958) and a retrospective clinical dataset from the University of Phayao Hospital (n = 176) were analyzed. Feature relevance was assessed using logistic regression, likelihood ratio testing, MRMR, ReliefF, and unified importance scoring. Multiple predictor configurations, ranging from full-feature to minimal and near-minimal models, were evaluated using decision tree, support vector machine, k-nearest neighbor, naïve Bayes, and efficient linear classifiers. External validation was performed using hospital-based records. Results: Across all analyses, age consistently emerged as the dominant predictor, followed by corticosteroid use, while other variables showed limited incremental predictive contributions. Simplified models based on age alone or age combined with medication-related variables achieved performances comparable to full-feature models (accuracy ≈91% and AUC ≈ 0.95). In addition, near-minimal models incorporating gender alongside age and medications demonstrated a favorable balance between discrimination and computational efficiency under external validation. Although overall performance declined under distributional shift, naïve Bayes and efficient linear classifiers showed the most stable external behavior (AUC = 0.728–0.787). Conclusions: These findings indicate that stability-driven feature selection primarily reproduces well-established epidemiological risk patterns rather than identifying novel predictors. Minimal and near-minimal models—including those incorporating gender—retain acceptable performances under external validation and are methodologically efficient. Given the limited size and single-center nature of the external cohort, the results should be interpreted as preliminary methodological evidence rather than definitive support for clinical screening deployment. Further multi-center studies are required to assess generalizability and clinical relevance.
Keywords: osteoporosis screening; feature selection; machine learning; external validation; risk prediction models osteoporosis screening; feature selection; machine learning; external validation; risk prediction models

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Woratamrongpatai, W.; Cholamjiak, W.; Eiamniran, N.; Udomluck, P. Stability-Driven Osteoporosis Screening: Multi-View Consensus Feature Selection with External Validation and Sensitivity Analysis. J. Clin. Med. 2026, 15, 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15020677

AMA Style

Woratamrongpatai W, Cholamjiak W, Eiamniran N, Udomluck P. Stability-Driven Osteoporosis Screening: Multi-View Consensus Feature Selection with External Validation and Sensitivity Analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2026; 15(2):677. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15020677

Chicago/Turabian Style

Woratamrongpatai, Waragunt, Watcharaporn Cholamjiak, Nontawat Eiamniran, and Phatcharapon Udomluck. 2026. "Stability-Driven Osteoporosis Screening: Multi-View Consensus Feature Selection with External Validation and Sensitivity Analysis" Journal of Clinical Medicine 15, no. 2: 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15020677

APA Style

Woratamrongpatai, W., Cholamjiak, W., Eiamniran, N., & Udomluck, P. (2026). Stability-Driven Osteoporosis Screening: Multi-View Consensus Feature Selection with External Validation and Sensitivity Analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 15(2), 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15020677

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Article metric data becomes available approximately 24 hours after publication online.
Back to TopTop