Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36425281›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2022

Machine learning in clinical diagnosis, prognostication, and management of acute traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI): A systematic review.

Nicholas Dietz, Vaitheesh Jaganathan, Victoria Alkin, Jersey Mettille, Maxwell Boakye, Doniel Drazin

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nicholas DietzDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Louisville, 200 Abraham Flexner Hwy, Louisville, KY, 40202, USA.
Vaitheesh JaganathanDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Louisville, 200 Abraham Flexner Hwy, Louisville, KY, 40202, USA.
Victoria AlkinCornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Jersey MettilleDepartment of Anesthesia, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA.
Maxwell BoakyeDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Louisville, 200 Abraham Flexner Hwy, Louisville, KY, 40202, USA.
Doniel DrazinDepartment of Neurosurgery, Providence Regional Medical Center Everett, Everett, WA, USA.
University of Louisville · USCornell University · USProvidence Regional Medical Center Everett · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Machine learning has been applied to improve diagnosis and prognostication of acute traumatic spinal cord injury. We investigate potential for clinical integration of machine learning in this patient population to navigate variability in injury and recovery. Materials and methods: We performed a systematic review using PRISMA guidelines through PubMed database to identify studies that use machine learning algorithms for clinical application toward improvements in diagnosis, management, and predictive modeling. Results: Of the 132 records identified, a total of 13 articles met inclusion criteria and were included in final analysis. Of the 13 articles, 5 focused on diagnostic accuracy and 8 were related to prognostication or management of traumatic spinal cord injury. Across studies, 1983 patients with spinal cord injury were evaluated with most classifying as ASIA C or D. Retrospective designs were used in 10 of 13 studies and 3 were prospective. Studies focused on MRI evaluation and segmentation for diagnostic accuracy and prognostication, investigation of mean arterial pressure in acute care and intraoperative settings, prediction of ambulatory and functional ability, chronic complication prevention, and psychological quality of life assessments. Decision tree, random forests (RF), support vector machines (SVM), hierarchical cluster tree analysis (HCTA), artificial neural networks (ANN), convolutional neural networks (CNN) machine learning subtypes were used. Conclusions: Machine learning represents a platform technology with clinical application in traumatic spinal cord injury diagnosis, prognostication, management, rehabilitation, and risk prevention of chronic complications and mental illness. SVM models showed improved accuracy when compared to other ML subtypes surveyed. Inherent variability across patients with SCI offers unique opportunity for ML and personalized medicine to drive desired outcomes and assess risks in this patient population.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceMachine learningPrediction toolSpinal cord injurySpine surgery

Identifiers

PMID36425281
PMCPMC9678757
OpenAlexW4306888980

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.