ArticleTranslational stroke research2023
Machine Learning-Based Identification of Target Groups for Thrombectomy in Acute Stroke.
Article in Translational stroke research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence in stroke risk assessment and management via retinal imaging.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2025Review
- Predictive outcome of late window ischemic stroke patients following endovascular therapy: a multi-center study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Machine learning models for outcome prediction in thrombectomy for large anterior vessel occlusion.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2024Article
- Clinical predictors of prognosis in stroke patients after endovascular therapy.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Machine Learning Application: A Bibliometric Analysis From a Half-Century of Research on Stroke.Cureus · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whether endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) improves functional outcome in patients with large-vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke that do not comply with inclusion criteria of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) but that are considered for EVT in clinical practice is uncertain. We aimed to systematically identify patients with LVO stroke underrepresented in RCTs who might benefit from EVT. Following the premises that (i) patients without reperfusion after EVT represent a non-treated control group and (ii) the level of reperfusion affects outcome in patients with benefit from EVT but not in patients without treatment benefit, we systematically assessed the importance of reperfusion level on functional outcome prediction using machine learning in patients with LVO stroke treated with EVT in clinical practice (N = 5235, German-Stroke-Registry) and in patients treated with EVT or best medical management from RCTs (N = 1488, Virtual-International-Stroke-Trials-Archive). The importance of reperfusion level on outcome prediction in an RCT-like real-world cohort equaled the importance of EVT treatment allocation for outcome prediction in RCT data and was higher compared to an unselected real-world population. The importance of reperfusion level was magnified in patient groups underrepresented in RCTs, including patients with lower NIHSS scores (0-10), M2 occlusions, and lower ASPECTS (0-5 and 6-8). Reperfusion level was equally important in patients with vertebrobasilar as with anterior LVO stroke. The importance of reperfusion level for outcome prediction identifies patient target groups who likely benefit from EVT, including vertebrobasilar stroke patients and among patients underrepresented in RCT patients with low NIHSS scores, low ASPECTS, and M2 occlusions.
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.