ArticleDigital health
Individualized predictions for clinical milestone in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: A multialgorithmic approach.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- FVC-DiP correlates with neurofilament light chain levels in serum and cerebrospinal fluid in patients with ALS.BMJ neurology open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The phenotypic heterogeneity and complex disease trajectory complicate the ability to predict specific clinical milestone for individual patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Here we developed individualized prediction models to estimate the time to the loss of autonomy in swallowing function. Methods: Utilizing the Pooled Resource Open-Access ALS Clinical Trials (PRO-ACT) database, we built three models of distinct time-to-event prediction algorithms: accelerated failure time (AFT), cox proportional hazard (COX) and random survival forest (RSF) for an individualized risk assessment of the swallowing milestone. The target variable was defined as the time to a decline in the ALSFRS-R swallowing item score to 1 or below, indicating a need for supplementary tube feeding. Results: Internal cross-validation revealed the median concordance index (C-index) of 0.851 (IQR, 0.842-0.859) for AFT, 0.850 (0.841-0.859) for COX and 0.846 (0.839-0.854) for RSF, and all models demonstrated good distributional calibration with predicted and observed event probabilities closely matched across different time intervals. For external validation with a registry dataset with characteristics different from PRO-ACT, the discriminative power was replicated with comparable C-indices for all models, whereas the calibration revealed a left-skewed distribution suggesting a bias towards overestimation of event probabilities in real-world data. While all models were effective at stratifying patients, the results of RSF model, unlike AFT and COX, did not match well with the KM curves of the corresponding risk groups, supporting the importance of nuanced understanding of data structure and algorithmic properties. Conclusion: Our models are implemented into a web application which could be applied to individualized counselling, management and clinical trial design for gastrostomy intervention. Further studies for model optimization will advance personalized care in patients with ALS.
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.