ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023
Stroke classification and treatment support system artificial intelligence for usefulness of stroke diagnosis.
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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Metabolomics reveals key biomarkers for ischemic stroke: a systematic review of emerging evidence.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Development of Functional Recovery Therapy for Post-Stroke Sequelae: Towards a Future without Stroke Aftereffects.Juntendo medical journal · 2025Article
- Clinical applications of artificial intelligence and machine learning in neurocardiology: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- TOAST stroke subtype classification in clinical practice: implications for the Get With The Guidelines-Stroke nationwide registry.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: It is important to diagnose cerebral infarction at an early stage and select an appropriate treatment method. The number of stroke-trained physicians is unevenly distributed; thus, a shortage of specialists is a major problem in some regions. In this retrospective design study, we tested whether an artificial intelligence (AI) we built using computer-aided detection/diagnosis may help medical physicians to classify stroke for the appropriate treatment. Methods: To build the Stroke Classification and Treatment Support System AI, the clinical data of 231 hospitalized patients with ischemic stroke from January 2016 to December 2017 were used for training the AI. To verify the diagnostic accuracy, 151 patients who were admitted for stroke between January 2018 and December 2018 were also enrolled. Results: By utilizing multimodal data, such as DWI and ADC map images, as well as patient examination data, we were able to construct an AI that can explain the analysis results with a small amount of training data. Furthermore, the AI was able to classify with high accuracy (Cohort 1, evaluation data 88.7%; Cohort 2, validation data 86.1%). Conclusion: In recent years, the treatment options for cerebral infarction have increased in number and complexity, making it even more important to provide appropriate treatment according to the initial diagnosis. This system could be used for initial treatment to automatically diagnose and classify strokes in hospitals where stroke-trained physicians are not available and improve the prognosis of cerebral infarction.
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.