ArticleScientific reports2024
Combining 2.5D deep learning and conventional features in a joint model for the early detection of sICH expansion.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Application of Deep Learning for Predicting Hematoma Expansion in Intracerebral Hemorrhage Using Computed Tomography Scans: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy.La Radiologia medica · 2025Pooled it
- Imaging studies for predicting hematoma expansion: from traditional imaging signs to artificial intelligence-based multimodal fusion.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The study aims to investigate the potential of training efficient deep learning models by using 2.5D (2.5-Dimension) masks of sICH. Furthermore, it intends to evaluate and compare the predictive performance of a joint model incorporating four types of features with standalone 2.5D deep learning, radiomics, radiology, and clinical models for early expansion in sICH. A total of 254 sICH patients were enrolled retrospectively and divided into two groups according to whether the hematoma was enlarged or not. The 2.5D mask of sICH is constructed with the maximum axial, coronal and sagittal planes of the hematoma, which is used to train the deep learning model and extract deep learning features. Predictive models were built on clinic, radiology, radiomics and deep learning features separately and four type features jointly. The diagnostic performance of each model was measured using the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), Accuracy, Recall, F1 and decision curve analysis (DCA). The AUCs of the clinic model, radiology model, radiomics model, deep learning model, joint model, and nomogram model on the train set (training and Cross-validation) were 0.639, 0.682, 0.859, 0.807, 0.939, and 0.942, respectively, while the AUCs on the test set (external validation) were 0.680, 0.758, 0.802, 0.857, 0.929, and 0.926. Decision curve analysis showed that the joint model was superior to the other models and demonstrated good consistency between the predicted probability of early hematoma expansion and the actual occurrence probability. Our study demonstrates that the joint model is a more efficient and robust prediction model, as verified by multicenter data. This finding highlights the potential clinical utility of a multifactorial prediction model that integrates various data sources for prognostication in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage. The Critical Relevance Statement: Combining 2.5D deep learning features with clinic features, radiology markers, and radiomics signatures to establish a joint model enabling physicians to conduct better-individualized assessments the risk of early expansion of sICH.
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.