Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35783143›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2022

Comparison of Conventional Logistic Regression and Machine Learning Methods for Predicting Delayed Cerebral Ischemia After Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Multicentric Observational Cohort Study.

Ping Hu, Yuntao Li, Yangfan Liu, Geng Guo, Xu Gao, Zhongzhou Su, Long Wang, Gang Deng, Shuang Yang, Yangzhi Qi and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

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

18 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Ping HuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Yuntao LiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Yangfan LiuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Affiliated Hospital of Panzhihua University, Panzhihua, China.
Geng GuoDepartment of Neurosurgery, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China.
Xu GaoDepartment of Neurosurgery, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang, China.
Zhongzhou SuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Huzhou Central Hospital, Huzhou, China.
Long WangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Gang DengDepartment of Neurosurgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Shuang YangSchool of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Yangzhi QiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Yang XuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Liguo YeDepartment of Neurosurgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Qian SunDepartment of Neurosurgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Xiaohu NieDepartment of Neurosurgery, Huzhou Central Hospital, Huzhou, China.
Yanqi SunDepartment of Neurosurgery, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China.
Mingchang LiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Hongbo ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
Qianxue ChenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Wuhan University · CNHuzhou Central Hospital · CNShanxi Medical University · CNGeneral Hospital of Shenyang Military Region · CNGuilin University of Aerospace Technology · CNNanchang University · CNPanzhihua University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Timely and accurate prediction of delayed cerebral ischemia is critical for improving the prognosis of patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Machine learning (ML) algorithms are increasingly regarded as having a higher prediction power than conventional logistic regression (LR). This study aims to construct LR and ML models and compare their prediction power on delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study that enrolled patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage from five hospitals in China. A total of 404 aSAH patients were prospectively enrolled. We randomly divided the patients into training ( Results: A total of 112 (27.7%) patients developed DCI. Our results showed that conventional LR with an AUC value of 0.824 (95%CI: 0.73-0.91) in the validation cohort outperformed k-nearest neighbor, decision tree, support vector machine, and extreme gradient boosting model with the AUCs of 0.792 (95%CI: 0.68-0.9, Conclusions: In this multicenter study, we found that several ML methods, particularly RF, outperformed conventional LR. Furthermore, an online prediction tool based on the RF model was developed to identify patients at high risk for DCI after SAH and facilitate timely interventions. Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.chictr.org.cn, Unique identifier: ChiCTR2100044448.

Indexed as

delayed cerebral ischemiainflammatory responselogistic regressionmachine learningprediction modelsubarachnoid hemorrhage

Identifiers

PMID35783143
PMCPMC9247265
OpenAlexW4283022454

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.