Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39253185›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

The comparative experimental study of rehabilitation program decision for spinal cord injury based on electronic medical records.

Botao Qie, Xin Guo, Wei Chen, Suiran Yu, Zhengtao Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Botao QieSchool of Artificial Intelligence and Data Science, Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin, 300401, China.
Xin GuoSchool of Artificial Intelligence and Data Science, Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin, 300401, China.
Wei ChenNational Research Center for Rehabilitation Technical Aids, Beijing, 100176, China.
Suiran YuSchool of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200240, China.
Zhengtao WangSchool of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200240, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Electronic medical records (EMRs) contain patients' medical and health information. The Utilization of EMRs for assisted diagnosis is of significant importance for the rehabilitation of spinal cord injury (SCI) patients. Therefore, this study proposes a decision-making model for rehabilitation programs of SCI patients based on EMRs. Methods: First, an Electronic Medical Records (EMR) dataset comprising 1252 Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) patients was constructed, and data preprocessing was completed. Second, the Random Forest (RF) feature extraction algorithm was utilized to select case features with high contribution levels. Then, to address the imbalance issue in EMRs, a multi-label learning framework based on the improved MLSMOTE was adopted. Finally, seven multi-label classification models were employed to predict patients' physical therapy (PT) prescriptions. Results: The proposed improved MLSMOTE multi-label learning framework can solve the problem of class imbalance. Compared with the other six models, the CC model has improved significantly in many metrics. Its hamming loss and ranking loss were 0.1388 and 0.2467, and precision, recall, and F1-score were 83.33 %, 81.20 %, and 79.82 % respectively. Conclusions: The improved MLSMOTE multi-label learning framework proposed in this study can make full use of the information in EMRs and effectively improve the decision-making accuracy of rehabilitation treatment programs.

Indexed as

Electronic medical recordMLSMOTEMulti-label classificationRehabilitation program decisionSpinal cord injury

Identifiers

PMID39253185
PMCPMC11381630

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.