ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022
Predicting the rupture status of small middle cerebral artery aneurysms using random forest modeling.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- GN-Net: A Geometric and Neighborhood-Aware Network for Predicting Intracranial Aneurysm Rupture Risk and Assisting Clinical Decision-Making.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 2026Article
- Development and validation of nomograms for aneurysm rupture risk and prognosis in Moyamoya disease with intracranial aneurysms.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Clinical Outcomes in Microsurgical Clipping Treatments of Cerebral Aneurysms.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Effective analysis of job satisfaction among medical staff in Chinese public hospitals: a random forest model.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- A deep-learning method for the end-to-end prediction of intracranial aneurysm rupture risk.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Small intracranial aneurysms are increasingly being detected; however, a prediction model for their rupture is rare. Random forest modeling was used to predict the rupture status of small middle cerebral artery (MCA) aneurysms with morphological features. Methods: From January 2009 to June 2020, we retrospectively reviewed patients with small MCA aneurysms (<7 mm). The aneurysms were randomly split into training (70%) and internal validation (30%) cohorts. Additional independent datasets were used for the external validation of 78 small MCA aneurysms from another four hospitals. Aneurysm morphology was determined using computed tomography angiography (CTA). Prediction models were developed using the random forest and multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 426 consecutive patients with 454 small MCA aneurysms (<7 mm) were included. A multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that size ratio (SR), aspect ratio (AR), and daughter dome were associated with aneurysm rupture, whereas aneurysm angle and multiplicity were inversely associated with aneurysm rupture. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUCs) of random forest models using the five independent risk factors in the training, internal validation, and external validation cohorts were 0.922, 0.889, and 0.92, respectively. The random forest model outperformed the logistic regression model ( Conclusion: Random forest modeling is a good tool for evaluating the rupture status of small MCA aneurysms and may be considered for the management of small aneurysms.
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.