Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32993692›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2020

Predicting clinically significant motor function improvement after contemporary task-oriented interventions using machine learning approaches.

Hiren Kumar Thakkar, Wan-Wen Liao, Ching-Yi Wu, Yu-Wei Hsieh, Tsong-Hai Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  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

5 authors.

Hiren Kumar ThakkarDepartment of Computer Science Engineering and School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Bennett University, Plot Nos 8-11, TechZone II, Greater Noida, 201310, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Wan-Wen LiaoDepartment of Occupational Therapy and Graduate Institute of Behavioral Sciences, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, No. 259, Wenhua 1st Rd., Taoyuan, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-7370-408X
Ching-Yi WuDepartment of Occupational Therapy and Graduate Institute of Behavioral Sciences, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, No. 259, Wenhua 1st Rd., Taoyuan, Taiwan. cywu@mail.cgu.edu.tw.ORCID 0000-0003-4726-2916
Yu-Wei HsiehDepartment of Occupational Therapy and Graduate Institute of Behavioral Sciences, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, No. 259, Wenhua 1st Rd., Taoyuan, Taiwan. ywhsieh@mail.cgu.edu.tw.ORCID 0000-0002-2564-8431
Tsong-Hai LeeDepartment of Neurology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate prediction of motor recovery after stroke is critical for treatment decisions and planning. Machine learning has been proposed to be a promising technique for outcome prediction because of its high accuracy and ability to process large volumes of data. It has been used to predict acute stroke recovery; however, whether machine learning would be effective for predicting rehabilitation outcomes in chronic stroke patients for common contemporary task-oriented interventions remains largely unexplored. This study aimed to determine the accuracy and performance of machine learning to predict clinically significant motor function improvements after contemporary task-oriented intervention in chronic stroke patients and identify important predictors for building machine learning prediction models.

methodsThis study was a secondary analysis of data using two common machine learning approaches, which were the k-nearest neighbor (KNN) and artificial neural network (ANN). Chronic stroke patients (N = 239) that received 30 h of task-oriented training including the constraint-induced movement therapy, bilateral arm training, robot-assisted therapy and mirror therapy were included. The Fugl-Meyer assessment scale (FMA) was the main outcome. Potential predictors include age, gender, side of lesion, time since stroke, baseline functional status, motor function and quality of life. We divided the data set into a training set and a test set and used the cross-validation procedure to construct machine learning models based on the training set. After the models were built, we used the test data set to evaluate the accuracy and prediction performance of the models.

resultsThree important predictors were identified, which were time since stroke, baseline functional independence measure (FIM) and baseline FMA scores. Models for predicting motor function improvements were accurate. The prediction accuracy of the KNN model was 85.42% and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) was 0.89. The prediction accuracy of the ANN model was 81.25% and the AUC-ROC was 0.77.

conclusionsIncorporating machine learning into clinical outcome prediction using three key predictors including time since stroke, baseline functional and motor ability may help clinicians/therapists to identify patients that are most likely to benefit from contemporary task-oriented interventions. The KNN and ANN models may be potentially useful for predicting clinically significant motor recovery in chronic stroke.

Indexed as

Machine LearningRecovery of FunctionAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysical Therapy ModalitiesPrognosisQuality of LifeROC CurveStrokeStroke RehabilitationMachine learningMotor functionPrognosisRehabilitationStroke

Identifiers

PMID32993692
PMCPMC7523081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.