SynthesisJournal of medical systems2024
Systematic Review of Machine Learning Applied to the Secondary Prevention of Ischemic Stroke.
Synthesis in Journal of medical systems, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning in the diagnosis and prognosis of transient ischaemic attack: a systematic review.BMC neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Digital Technologies Across the Stroke Continuum: From Risk Prediction to Real-Time Monitoring and Rapid Response.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Integrative Multidimensional Machine Learning Models for Stroke Prognosis: Age-Stratified and History Engineered Perspectives.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Explainable multi-modal approach for uncovering key predictors of stroke-risk from ECG, EMG, blood pressure, and respiratory signals.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Clinically oriented dual-tier screening for post-stroke epilepsy with interpretable machine learning in a severely imbalanced cohort.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Developing an Explainable Prognostic Model for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Combining Clinical and Inflammatory Biomarkers With Machine Learning.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Association of bioimpedance analysis parameters trajectories with clinical outcomes in neurocritical patients.Heliyon · 2024Article
- The Multicentre Acute ischemic stroke imaGIng and Clinical data (MAGIC) repository: rationale and blueprint.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2024Article
- Association between dietary intake of niacin and stroke in the US residents: evidence from national health and nutrition examination survey (NHANES) 1999-2018.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Article
- Machine learning is an effective method to predict the 3-month prognosis of patients with acute ischemic stroke.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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Ischemic stroke is a serious disease posing significant threats to human health and life, with the highest absolute and relative risks of a poor prognosis following the first occurrence, and more than 90% of strokes are attributable to modifiable risk factors. Currently, machine learning (ML) is widely used for the prediction of ischemic stroke outcomes. By identifying risk factors, predicting the risk of poor prognosis and thus developing personalized treatment plans, it effectively reduces the probability of poor prognosis, leading to more effective secondary prevention. This review includes 41 studies since 2018 that used ML algorithms to build prognostic prediction models for ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), and acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We analyzed in detail the risk factors used in these studies, the sources and processing methods of the required data, the model building and validation, and their application in different prediction time windows. The results indicate that among the included studies, the top five risk factors in terms of frequency were cardiovascular diseases, age, sex, national institutes of health stroke scale (NIHSS) score, and diabetes. Furthermore, 64% of the studies used single-center data, 65% of studies using imbalanced data did not perform data balancing, 88% of the studies did not utilize external validation datasets for model validation, and 72% of the studies did not provide explanations for their models. Addressing these issues is crucial for enhancing the credibility and effectiveness of the research, consequently improving the development and implementation of secondary prevention measures.
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.