ArticleCommunications medicine2024
Distinct brain morphometry patterns revealed by deep learning improve prediction of post-stroke aphasia severity.
Article in Communications medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting Post-Stroke Aphasia Speech Performance from Multimodal Data with Explainable Machine Learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- A Review on the Detection of Plant Disease Using Machine Learning and Deep Learning Approaches.Journal of imaging · 2025Review
- Article
- Precision-Optimised Post-Stroke Prognoses.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2025Article
- Distinct brain morphometry patterns revealed by deep learning improve prediction of post-stroke aphasia severity.Communications medicine · 2024Article
- Stable multivariate lesion symptom mapping.Aperture neuro · 2024Article
- Machine learning models in post-stroke aphasia: a scoping review.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEmerging evidence suggests that post-stroke aphasia severity depends on the integrity of the brain beyond the lesion. While measures of lesion anatomy and brain integrity combine synergistically to explain aphasic symptoms, substantial interindividual variability remains unaccounted. One explanatory factor may be the spatial distribution of morphometry beyond the lesion (e.g., atrophy), including not just specific brain areas, but distinct three-dimensional patterns.
methodsHere, we test whether deep learning with Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) on whole brain morphometry (i.e., segmented tissue volumes) and lesion anatomy better predicts chronic stroke individuals with severe aphasia (N = 231) than classical machine learning (Support Vector Machines; SVMs), evaluating whether encoding spatial dependencies identifies uniquely predictive patterns.
resultsCNNs achieve higher balanced accuracy and F1 scores, even when SVMs are nonlinear or integrate linear or nonlinear dimensionality reduction. Parity only occurs when SVMs access features learned by CNNs. Saliency maps demonstrate that CNNs leverage distributed morphometry patterns, whereas SVMs focus on the area around the lesion. Ensemble clustering of CNN saliencies reveals distinct morphometry patterns unrelated to lesion size, consistent across individuals, and which implicate unique networks associated with different cognitive processes as measured by the wider neuroimaging literature. Individualized predictions depend on both ipsilateral and contralateral features outside the lesion.
conclusionsThree-dimensional network distributions of morphometry are directly associated with aphasia severity, underscoring the potential for CNNs to improve outcome prognostication from neuroimaging data, and highlighting the prospective benefits of interrogating spatial dependence at different scales in multivariate feature space.
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.