ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023
Development and validation of a novel clinical prediction model to predict the 90-day functional outcome of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage.
Article 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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- AI-assisted versus fully automated volumetry for hemorrhage quantification in spontaneous ICH with ventricular extension: A multi-center study.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Predicting long-term outcomes in intracerebral hemorrhage: a comparative study of machine learning models highlights the prognostic value of hematoma clearance.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Article
- Development and validation of a clinical-radiomics nomogram for predicting 180-day functional outcomes in patients with spontaneous thalamic hemorrhage.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a machine learning-based predictive model for assessing the 90-day prognostic outcome of patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Article
- Assessing the Adequacy of a Prediction Model.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social MedicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH) is associated with high mortality and disability. Accurately predicting adverse prognostic risks of SICH is helpful in developing risk stratification and precision medicine strategies for this phenomenon. Methods: We analyzed 413 patients with SICH admitted to Hefei Second People's Hospital as a training cohort, considering 74 patients from the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University for external validation. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to select risk factors for 90-day functional outcomes, and a nomogram was developed to predict their incidence in patients. Discrimination, fitting performance, and clinical utility of the resulting nomogram were evaluated through receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), calibration plots, and decision curves analysis (DCA), respectively. Results: Of the 413 patients, 180 had a poor prognosis. Univariate analysis showed significant variance of age, systolic pressure, intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores, National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores, and hematoma volume between the groups ( Conclusion: We developed and validated a short-term prognostic nomogram model for patients with SICH including NIHSS scores, age, hematoma volume, and IVH. This model has valuable potential in predicting the prognosis of patients with SICH.
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.