ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2024
Bayesian networks for Risk Assessment and postoperative deficit prediction in intraoperative neurophysiology for brain surgery.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correcting model error bias in estimations of neuronal dynamics from time series observations.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Envisioning the Future of the Neurosurgical Operating Room with the Concept of the Medical Metaverse.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2025Article
- Opportunities and challenges of supervised machine learning for the classification of motor evoked potentials according to muscles.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo this day there is no consensus regarding evidence of usefulness of Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring (IONM). Randomized controlled trials have not been performed in the past mainly because of difficulties in recruitment control subjects. In this study, we propose the use of Bayesian Networks to assess evidence in IONM.
methodsSingle center retrospective study from January 2020 to January 2022. Patients admitted for cranial neurosurgery with intraoperative neuromonitoring were enrolled. We built a Bayesian Network with utility calculation using expert domain knowledge based on logistic regression as potential causal inference between events in surgery that could lead to central nervous system injury and postoperative neurological function.
resultsA total of 267 patients were included in the study: 198 (73.9%) underwent neuro-oncology surgery and 69 (26.1%) neurovascular surgery. 50.7% of patients were female while 49.3% were male. Using the Bayesian Network´s original state probabilities, we found that among patients who presented with a reversible signal change that was acted upon, 59% of patients would wake up with no new neurological deficits, 33% with a transitory deficit and 8% with a permanent deficit. If the signal change was permanent, in 16% of the patients the deficit would be transitory and in 51% it would be permanent. 33% of patients would wake up with no new postoperative deficit. Our network also shows that utility increases when corrective actions are taken to revert a signal change.
conclusionsBayesian Networks are an effective way to audit clinical practice within IONM. We have found that IONM warnings can serve to prevent neurological deficits in patients, especially when corrective surgical action is taken to attempt to revert signals changes back to baseline properties. We show that Bayesian Networks could be used as a mathematical tool to calculate the utility of conducting IONM, which could save costs in healthcare when performed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38722406What 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.