Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32350658›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2020

Development and validation of machine learning prediction model based on computed tomography angiography-derived hemodynamics for rupture status of intracranial aneurysms: a Chinese multicenter study.

Guozhong Chen, Mengjie Lu, Zhao Shi, Shuang Xia, Yuan Ren, Zhen Liu, Xiuxian Liu, Zhiyong Li, Li Mao, Xiu Li Li and 3 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Systematic Review of Radiomics and Artificial Intelligence in Intracranial Aneurysm Management.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Guozhong ChenDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210002, Jiangsu, China.
Mengjie LuDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210002, Jiangsu, China.
Zhao ShiDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210002, Jiangsu, China.
Shuang XiaTianjin First Central Hospital, Tianjin, 300070, China.
Yuan RenSchool of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096, China.
Zhen LiuSchool of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096, China.
Xiuxian LiuSchool of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096, China.
Zhiyong LiSchool of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096, China.
Li MaoDeepwise AI Lab, Beijing, 100089, China.
Xiu Li LiDeepwise AI Lab, Beijing, 100089, China.
Bo ZhangTaizhou People's Hospital, Taizhou, 225309, Jiangsu, China.
Long Jiang ZhangDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210002, Jiangsu, China. kevinzhlj@163.com.
Guang Ming LuDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210002, Jiangsu, China. cjr.luguangming@vip.163.com.

Funding

The National Key Research and Development Program of China 2017YFC0113400The National Natural Science Foundation of China No.81803338
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo build models based on conventional logistic regression (LR) and machine learning (ML) algorithms combining clinical, morphological, and hemodynamic information to predict individual rupture status of unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs), afterwards tested in internal and external validation datasets.

methodsPatients with intracranial aneurysms diagnosed by computed tomography angiography and confirmed by invasive cerebral angiograph or clipping surgery were included. The prediction models were developed based on clinical, aneurysm morphological, and hemodynamic parameters by conventional LR and ML methods.

resultsThe training, internal validation, and external validation cohorts were composed of 807 patients, 200 patients, and 108 patients, respectively. The area under curves (AUCs) of conventional LR models 1 (clinical), 2 (clinical and aneurysm morphological), and 3 (clinical, aneurysm morphological and hemodynamic characteristics) were 0.608, 0.765, and 0.886, respectively (all p < 0.05). The AUCs of ML models using random forest (RF), multilayer perceptron (MLP), and support vector machine (SVM) were 0.871, 0.851, and 0.863, respectively. There were no difference among AUCs of conventional LR, RF, and SVM (all p > 0.05/6), while the AUC of MLP was lower than that of conventional LR (p = 0.0055).

conclusionHemodynamic parameters play an important role in the prediction performance of the models. ML methods cannot outperform conventional LR in prediction models for rupture status of UIAs integrating clinical, aneurysm morphological, and hemodynamic parameters. KEY POINTS: • The addition of hemodynamic parameters can improve prediction performance for rupture status of unruptured intracranial aneurysms. • Machine learning algorithms cannot outperform conventional logistic regression in prediction models for rupture status integrating clinical, aneurysm morphological, and hemodynamic parameters. • Models integrating clinical, aneurysm morphological, and hemodynamic parameters may help choose the optimal management.

Indexed as

HemodynamicsNeural Networks, ComputerSupport Vector MachineAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAneurysm, RupturedArea Under CurveCerebral AngiographyChinaClinical Decision RulesComputed Tomography AngiographyComputer SimulationFemaleHumansAngiographyIntracranial aneurysmMachine learningRuptureTomography, X-ray computed

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.