Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37843210›Full record

ReviewNeural regeneration research2024

Machine learning applications in stroke medicine: advancements, challenges, and future prospectives.

Mario Daidone, Sergio Ferrantelli, Antonino Tuttolomondo

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neural regeneration research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
21.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 100 citations in OpenAlex.

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

3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Mario DaidoneInternal Medicine and Stroke Care Ward, Department of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties; Molecular and Clinical Medicine PhD Program, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Sergio FerrantelliInternal Medicine and Stroke Care Ward, Department of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Antonino TuttolomondoInternal Medicine and Stroke Care Ward, Department of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Weatherford College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stroke is a leading cause of disability and mortality worldwide, necessitating the development of advanced technologies to improve its diagnosis, treatment, and patient outcomes. In recent years, machine learning techniques have emerged as promising tools in stroke medicine, enabling efficient analysis of large-scale datasets and facilitating personalized and precision medicine approaches. This abstract provides a comprehensive overview of machine learning's applications, challenges, and future directions in stroke medicine. Recently introduced machine learning algorithms have been extensively employed in all the fields of stroke medicine. Machine learning models have demonstrated remarkable accuracy in imaging analysis, diagnosing stroke subtypes, risk stratifications, guiding medical treatment, and predicting patient prognosis. Despite the tremendous potential of machine learning in stroke medicine, several challenges must be addressed. These include the need for standardized and interoperable data collection, robust model validation and generalization, and the ethical considerations surrounding privacy and bias. In addition, integrating machine learning models into clinical workflows and establishing regulatory frameworks are critical for ensuring their widespread adoption and impact in routine stroke care. Machine learning promises to revolutionize stroke medicine by enabling precise diagnosis, tailored treatment selection, and improved prognostication. Continued research and collaboration among clinicians, researchers, and technologists are essential for overcoming challenges and realizing the full potential of machine learning in stroke care, ultimately leading to enhanced patient outcomes and quality of life. This review aims to summarize all the current implications of machine learning in stroke diagnosis, treatment, and prognostic evaluation. At the same time, another purpose of this paper is to explore all the future perspectives these techniques can provide in combating this disabling disease.

Indexed as

cerebrovascular diseasedeep learningmachine learningreinforcement learningstrokestroke therapysupervised learningunsupervised learning

Identifiers

PMID37843210
PMCPMC10664112
OpenAlexW4386575673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.