ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2023
Opportunities and challenges of supervised machine learning for the classification of motor evoked potentials according to muscles.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2023. 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.
- Detection and Early Detection of Pathological Motor Evoked Potentials: A Novel Approach for Intraoperative Neuromonitoring Assistance.Journal of healthcare informatics research · 2026Article
- Neurosurgical Application of Artificial Intelligence in Pediatric Neuro-Oncology.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2026Article
- Prevalence and Associated Factors of Frailty in Middle-Aged and Elderly Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: An Exploratory Machine Learning Analysis.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Article
- The future of intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) in spinal surgery.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- Explainable AI for Intraoperative Motor-Evoked Potential Muscle Classification in Neurosurgery: Bicentric Retrospective Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Does an improvement in cord-level intraoperative neuromonitoring data lead to a reduced risk for postoperative neurologic deficit in spine deformity surgery?Spine deformity · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEven for an experienced neurophysiologist, it is challenging to look at a single graph of an unlabeled motor evoked potential (MEP) and identify the corresponding muscle. We demonstrate that supervised machine learning (ML) can successfully perform this task.
methodsIntraoperative MEP data from supratentorial surgery on 36 patients was included for the classification task with 4 muscles: Extensor digitorum (EXT), abductor pollicis brevis (APB), tibialis anterior (TA) and abductor hallucis (AH). Three different supervised ML classifiers (random forest (RF), k-nearest neighbors (kNN) and logistic regression (LogReg)) were trained and tested on either raw or compressed data. Patient data was classified considering either all 4 muscles simultaneously, 2 muscles within the same extremity (EXT versus APB), or 2 muscles from different extremities (EXT versus TA).
resultsIn all cases, RF classifiers performed best and kNN second best. The highest performances were achieved on raw data (4 muscles 83%, EXT versus APB 89%, EXT versus TA 97% accuracy).
conclusionsStandard ML methods show surprisingly high performance on a classification task with intraoperative MEP signals. This study illustrates the power and challenges of standard ML algorithms when handling intraoperative signals and may lead to intraoperative safety improvements.
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.