ArticleScientific reports2022
Artificially-reconstructed brain images with stroke lesions from non-imaging data: modeling in categorized patients based on lesion occurrence and sparsity.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brain imaging is necessary for understanding disease symptoms, including stroke. However, frequent imaging procedures encounter practical limitations. Estimating the brain information (e.g., lesions) without imaging sessions is beneficial for this scenario. Prospective estimating variables are non-imaging data collected from standard tests. Therefore, the current study aims to examine the variable feasibility for modelling lesion locations. Heterogeneous variables were employed in the multivariate logistic regression. Furthermore, patients were categorized (i.e., unsupervised clustering through k-means method) by the charasteristics of lesion occurrence (i.e., ratio between the lesioned and total regions) and sparsity (i.e., density measure of lesion occurrences across regions). Considering those charasteristics in models improved estimation performances. Lesions (116 regions in Automated Anatomical Labeling) were adequately predicted (sensitivity: 80.0-87.5% in median). We confirmed that the usability of models was extendable to different resolution levels in the brain region of interest (e.g., lobes, hemispheres). Patients' charateristics (i.e., occurrence and sparsity) might also be explained by the non-imaging data as well. Advantages of the current approach can be experienced by any patients (i.e., with or without imaging sessions) in any clinical facilities (i.e., with or without imaging instrumentation).
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.