ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2023
Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation Outcome Prediction Using Machine Learning Methods.
Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting recreational therapy engagement in veterans' long-term care: a machine learning approach.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Functional recovery of patients with moderate and severe traumatic brain injury after extended and standard early rehabilitation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- log-RRIM: Yield Prediction via Local-to-Global Reaction Representation Learning and Interaction Modeling.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2025Article
- Clinical Assessment on Days 1-14 for the Characterization of Traumatic Brain Injury: Recommendations from the 2024 NINDS Traumatic Brain Injury Classification and Nomenclature Initiative Clinical/Symptoms Working Group.Journal of neurotrauma · 2025Review
- Setting the foundation for a national collaborative learning health system in acute TBI rehabilitation: CARE4TBI Year 1 experience.Learning health systems · 2025Article
- Advancements in the application of multimodal monitoring and machine learning for the development of personalized therapeutic strategies in traumatic brain injury.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Review
- Predictive Modeling of Long-Term Care Needs in Traumatic Brain Injury Patients Using Machine Learning.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Explainable machine learning for predicting lower extremity deep vein thrombosis in traumatic brain injury patients: development of a SHAP-guided Random Forest model.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the performance of machine learning (ML) methods for predicting outcomes from inpatient rehabilitation for subjects with TBI using a dataset with a large number of predictor variables. Our second objective was to identify top predictive features selected by the ML models for each outcome and to validate the interpretability of the models. Design: Secondary analysis using computational modeling of relationships between patients, injury and treatment activities and 6 outcomes, applied to the large multi-site, prospective, longitudinal observational dataset collected during the traumatic brain injury inpatient rehabilitation study. Setting: Acute inpatient rehabilitation. Participants: 1946 patients aged 14 years or older, who sustained a severe, moderate, or complicated mild TBI, and were admitted to 1 of 9 US inpatient rehabilitation sites between 2008 and 2011 (N=1946). Main Outcome Measures: Rehabilitation length of stay, discharge to home, FIM cognitive and FIM motor at discharge and at 9-months post discharge. Results: Advanced ML models, specifically gradient boosting tree model, performed consistently better than all other models, including classical linear regression models. Top ranked predictive features were identified for each of the 6 outcome variables. Level of effort, days to rehabilitation admission, age at rehabilitation admission, and advanced mobility activities were the most frequently top ranked predictive features. The highest-ranking predictive feature differed across the specific outcome variable. Conclusions: Identifying patient, injury, and rehabilitation treatment variables that are predictive of better outcomes will contribute to cost-effective care delivery and guide evidence-based clinical practice. ML methods can contribute to these efforts.
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.