ReviewMethodsX2024
Machine learning and brain-computer interface approaches in prognosis and individualized care strategies for individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: A systematic review.
Review in MethodsX, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating education-based interventions and machine learning for stunting prevention: A case study in East Lombok, Indonesia.Dialogues in health · 2026Article
- New Insights into Drug Development via the Nose-to-Brain Pathway: Exemplification Through Dodecyl Creatine Ester for Neuronal Disorders.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- An efficient dimensionality reduction framework using metaheuristic optimization with deep learning models for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis disease progression prediction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Motor imagery EEG signal classification using novel deep learning algorithm.Scientific reports · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) characterized by progressive degeneration of motor neurons is a debilitating disease, posing substantial challenges in both prognosis and daily life assistance. However, with the advancement of machine learning (ML) which is renowned for tackling many real-world settings, it can offer unprecedented opportunities in prognostic studies and facilitate individuals with ALS in motor-imagery tasks. ML models, such as random forests (RF), have emerged as the most common and effective algorithms for predicting disease progression and survival time in ALS. The findings revealed that RF models had an excellent predictive performance for ALS, with a testing R2 of 0.524 and minimal treatment effects of 0.0717 for patient survival time. Despite significant limitations in sample size, with a maximum of 18 participants, which may not adequately reflect the population diversity being studied, ML approaches have been effectively applied to ALS datasets, and numerous prognostic models have been tested using neuroimaging data, longitudinal datasets, and core clinical variables. In many literatures, the constraints of ML models are seldom explicitly enunciated. Therefore, the main objective of this research is to provide a review of the most significant studies on the usage of ML models for analyzing ALS. This review covers a variation of ML algorithms involved in applications in ALS prognosis besides, leveraging ML to improve the efficacy of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) for ALS individuals in later stages with restricted voluntary muscular control. The key future advances in individualized care and ALS prognosis may include the advancement of more personalized care aids that enable real-time input and ongoing validation of ML in diverse healthcare contexts.
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.