ReviewFrontiers in neurology2023
Deep learning for EEG-based prognostication after cardiac arrest: from current research to future clinical applications.
Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in neurocardiology: decoding brain-heart network interactions for clinical and translational insights.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Using weak signals to predict spontaneous breathing trial success: a machine learning approach.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2025Article
- What does my network learn? Assessing interpretability of deep learning for EEG.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Role of artificial intelligence in predicting neurological outcomes in postcardiac resuscitation.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Outcome prognostication in comatose patients after cardiac arrest (CA) remains to date a challenge. The major determinant of clinical outcome is the post-hypoxic/ischemic encephalopathy. Electroencephalography (EEG) is routinely used to assess neural functions in comatose patients. Currently, EEG-based outcome prognosis relies on visual evaluation by medical experts, which is time consuming, prone to subjectivity, and oblivious to complex patterns. The field of deep learning has given rise to powerful algorithms for detecting patterns in large amounts of data. Analyzing EEG signals of coma patients with deep neural networks with the goal of assisting in outcome prognosis is therefore a natural application of these algorithms. Here, we provide the first narrative literature review on the use of deep learning for prognostication after CA. Existing studies show overall high performance in predicting outcome, relying either on spontaneous or on auditory evoked EEG signals. Moreover, the literature is concerned with algorithmic interpretability, and has shown that largely, deep neural networks base their decisions on clinically or neurophysiologically meaningful features. We conclude this review by discussing considerations that the fields of artificial intelligence and neurology will need to jointly address in the future, in order for deep learning algorithms to break the publication barrier, and to be integrated in clinical practice.
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.