ReviewHealth science reports2024
The most efficient machine learning algorithms in stroke prediction: A systematic review.
Review in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Machine Learning Models in Predicting Functional Outcome of Thrombectomy for Acute Posterior Circulation Artery Occlusion: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical neuroradiology · 2026Pooled it
- An artificial intelligence model integrating clinico-laboratory data and single nucleotide polymorphism-based genomic risk for prostate cancer diagnosis in Korean men.Investigative and clinical urology · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating machine learning models for stroke prediction based on clinical variables.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- A machine learning model based on emergency clinical data predicting 3-day in-hospital mortality for stroke and trauma patients.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- The most efficient machine learning algorithms in stroke prediction: A systematic review.Health science reports · 2024Review
- A hybrid random forest model for stroke risk prediction.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Stroke is one of the most common causes of death worldwide, leading to numerous complications and significantly diminishing the quality of life for those affected. The purpose of this study is to systematically review published papers on stroke prediction using machine learning algorithms and introduce the most efficient machine learning algorithms and compare their performance. The papers have published in period from 2019 to August 2023. Methods: The authors conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE using the keywords "Artificial Intelligence," "Predictive Modeling," "Machine Learning," "Stroke," and "Cerebrovascular Accident" from 2019 to August 2023. Results: Twenty articles were included based on the inclusion criteria. The Random Forest (RF) algorithm was introduced as the best and most efficient stroke ML algorithm in 25% of the articles ( Conclusion: This research has shown a rapid increase in using ML algorithms to predict stroke, with significant improvements in model accuracy in recent years. However, no model has reached 100% accuracy or is entirely error-free. Variations in algorithm efficiency and accuracy stem from differences in sample sizes, datasets, and data types. Further studies should focus on consistent datasets, sample sizes, and data types for more reliable outcomes.
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.