ArticleNeurocritical care2021
Identifying Modifiable Predictors of Patient Outcomes After Intracerebral Hemorrhage with Machine Learning.
Article in Neurocritical care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Poor Outcomes in Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Brain and behavior · 2026Pooled it
- Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Critically Ill Adults with Intracerebral Hemorrhage.Neurocritical care · 2024Guideline
- Machine learning prediction of motor function in chronic stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Pooled it
- Can Artificial Intelligence Be Applied to Diagnose Intracerebral Hemorrhage under the Background of the Fourth Industrial Revolution? A Novel Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of clinical practice · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Association Between Intraventricular Alteplase Use and Parenchymal Hematoma Volume in Patients With Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage and Intraventricular Hemorrhage.JAMA network open · 2021Trial
- Article
- Deep Learning for Dynamic Prognostic Prediction in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Model Development and Validation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Association of Thromboelastography With Hematoma Expansion and Disability in Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Multicenter Study.Neurology open access · 2026Article
- Advanced radiomics techniques applied on carotid duplex ultrasound data predict adverse outcomes in acute ischemic stroke.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Postoperative Rebleeding: The Sword of Damocles in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Intracerebral Hemorrhage.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Review
- Phenotypes of Patients with Intracerebral Hemorrhage, Complications, and Outcomes.Neurocritical care · 2025Article
- Anticoagulation management in intracerebral hemorrhage patients with deep vein thrombosis: insights from unsupervised machine learning and nomogram analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Review
- A comprehensive comparison of machine learning models for ICH prognostication: Retrospective review of 1501 intra-cerebral hemorrhage patients from the Qatar stroke database.Neurosurgical review · 2024Article
- Application of deep learning and radiomics in the prediction of hematoma expansion in intracerebral hemorrhage: a fully automated hybrid approachDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2024Article
- Brain is also time: good short-term outcome predictions of artificial intelligence in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage pave the way for the long-term assessment.European radiology · 2024Article
- CT-based deep learning model for predicting hospital discharge outcome in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage.European radiology · 2024Article
- Predicting the recurrence of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage using a machine learning model.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Development and validation of a random forest model to predict functional outcome in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectiveDemonstrating a benefit of acute treatment to patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) requires identifying which patients have a potentially modifiable outcome, where treatment could favorably shift a patient's expected outcome. A decision rule for which patients have a modifiable outcome could improve the targeting of treatments. We sought to determine which patients with ICH have a modifiable outcome.
methodsPatients with ICH were prospectively identified at two institutions. Data on hematoma volumes, medication histories, and other variables of interest were collected. ICH outcomes were evaluated using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), assessed at 14 days and 3 months after ICH, with "good outcome" defined as 0-3 (independence or better) and "poor outcome" defined as 4-6 (dependence or worse). Supervised machine learning models identified the best predictors of good versus poor outcomes at Institution 1. Models were validated using repeated fivefold cross-validation as well as testing on the entirely independent sample at Institution 2. Model fit was assessed with area under the ROC curve (AUC).
resultsModel performance at Institution 1 was strong for both 14-day (AUC of 0.79 [0.77, 0.81] for decision tree, 0.85 [0.84, 0.87] for random forest) and 3 month (AUC of 0.75 [0.73, 0.77] for decision tree, 0.82 [0.80, 0.84] for random forest) outcomes. Independent predictors of functional outcome selected by the algorithms as important included hematoma volume at hospital admission, hematoma expansion, intraventricular hemorrhage, overall ICH Score, and Glasgow Coma Scale. Hematoma expansion was the only potentially modifiable independent predictor of outcome and was compatible with "good" or "poor" outcome in a subset of patients with low hematoma volumes, good Glasgow Coma scale and premorbid modified Rankin Scale scores. Models trained on harmonized data also predicted patient outcomes well at Institution 2 using decision tree (AUC 0.69 [0.63, 0.75]) and random forests (AUC 0.78 [0.72, 0.84]).
conclusionsPatient outcomes are predictable to a high level in patients with ICH, and hematoma expansion is the sole-modifiable predictor of these outcomes across two outcome types and modeling approaches. According to decision tree analyses predicting outcome at 3 months, patients with a high Glasgow Coma Scale score, less than 44.5 mL hematoma volume at admission, and relatively low premorbid modified Rankin Score in particular have a modifiable outcome and appear to be candidates for future interventions to improve outcomes after ICH.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.