Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38002653›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023

Predicting the Outcome of Patients with Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Machine-Learning-Guided Scorecard.

Yi Zhang, Hanhai Zeng, Hang Zhou, Jingbo Li, Tingting Wang, Yinghan Guo, Lingxin Cai, Junwen Hu, Xiaotong Zhang, Gao Chen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Machine learning modeling for outcome prediction of hospitalized patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yi ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.
Hanhai ZengDepartment of Neurosurgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7514-0492
Hang ZhouDepartment of Neurosurgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.
Jingbo LiDepartment of Neurointensive Care Unit, Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.
Tingting WangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.
Yinghan GuoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.
Lingxin CaiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.
Junwen HuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.
Xiaotong ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9197-1421
Gao ChenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.
Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University · CNZhejiang Lab · CN

Funding

Key R&D Program of Zhejiang 2022C03133National Natural Science Foundation of China 52277232, 81971099, 82171273, 82171275Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China LR23E070001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) frequently causes long-term disability, but predicting outcomes remains challenging. Routine parameters such as demographics, admission status, CT findings, and blood tests can be used to predict aSAH outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of traditional logistic regression with several machine learning algorithms using readily available indicators and to generate a practical prognostic scorecard based on machine learning. Eighteen routinely available indicators were collected as outcome predictors for individuals with aSAH. Logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), support vector machines (SVMs), and fully connected neural networks (FCNNs) were compared. A scorecard system was established based on predictor weights. The results show that machine learning models and a scorecard achieved 0.75~0.8 area under the curve (AUC) predicting aSAH outcomes (LR 0.739, RF 0.749, SVM 0.762~0.793, scorecard 0.794). FCNNs performed best (~0.95) but lacked interpretability. The scorecard model used only five factors, generating a clinically useful tool with a total cutoff score of ≥5, indicating poor prognosis. We developed and validated machine learning models proven to predict outcomes more accurately in individuals with aSAH. The parameters found to be the most strongly predictive of outcomes were NLR, lymphocyte count, monocyte count, hypertension status, and SEBES. The scorecard system provides a simplified means of applying predictive analytics at the bedside using a few key indicators.

Indexed as

aneurysmal subarachnoidhemorrhagemachine learningpredictionscorecard

Identifiers

PMID38002653
PMCPMC10671848
OpenAlexW4388637484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.