SynthesisJournal of neurology2021
Prognostic models for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Construction and Verification of a Risk Prediction Model for the Occurrence of Delayed Cerebral Ischemia after Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Requiring Mechanical Ventilation.BioMed research international · 2023Trial
- Development of a machine learning-based survival prediction model for ALS inclusive of the advanced-stage population.Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis & frontotemporal degeneration · 2026Article
- Developing prognostic models that predict onset and progression rates in genetic neurodegenerative diseases: perspectives of healthcare professionals in genetic counselling.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2026Article
- A neuromuscular clinician's primer on machine learning.Journal of neuromuscular diseases · 2026Review
- An efficient dimensionality reduction framework using metaheuristic optimization with deep learning models for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis disease progression prediction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Predicting Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Mortality With Machine Learning in Diverse Patient Databases.Muscle & nerve · 2025Article
- Evaluating the predictive potential of Th1 (IFN-γJournal of neurology · 2025Article
- The reporting quality and methodological quality of dynamic prediction models for cancer prognosis.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Prognostic communication in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: findings from a Nationwide Italian survey.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024Article
- Update on recent advances in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.Journal of neurology · 2024Review
- Correlation of single-fiber electromyography studies and functional status in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2024Article
- Role of brain 2-[European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence and its impact on the domains of universal health coverage, health emergencies and health promotion: An overview of systematic reviews.International journal of medical informatics · 2022Review
- Innovating Clinical Trials for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: Challenging the Established Order.Neurology · 2021Article
- Prognostic prediction by hypermetabolism varies depending on the nutritional status in early amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- A modified frailty index to identify high-risk groups for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
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
backgroundIncreasing prognostic models for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) have been developed. However, no comprehensive evaluation of these models has been done. The purpose of this study was to map the prognostic models for ALS to assess their potential contribution and suggest future improvements on modeling strategy.
methodsDatabases including Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane library were searched from inception to 20 February 2021. All studies developing and/or validating prognostic models for ALS were selected. Information regarding modelling method and methodological quality was extracted.
resultsA total of 28 studies describing the development of 34 models and the external validation of 19 models were included. The outcomes concerned were ALS progression (n = 12; 35%), change in weight (n = 1; 3%), respiratory insufficiency (n = 2; 6%), and survival (n = 19; 56%). Among the models predicting ALS progression or survival, the most frequently used predictors were age, ALS Functional Rating Scale/ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised, site of onset, and disease duration. The modelling method adopted most was machine learning (n = 16; 47%). Most of the models (n = 25; 74%) were not presented. Discrimination and calibration were assessed in 12 (35%) and 2 (6%) models, respectively. Only one model by Westeneng et al. (Lancet Neurol 17:423-433, 2018) was assessed with overall low risk of bias and it performed well in both discrimination and calibration, suggesting a relatively reliable model for practice.
conclusionsThis study systematically reviewed the prognostic models for ALS. Their usefulness is questionable due to several methodological pitfalls and the lack of external validation done by fully independent researchers. Future research should pay more attention to the addition of novel promising predictors, external validation, and head-to-head comparisons of existing models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33694050What 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.