ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Construction of a poor prognosis prediction and visualization system for intracranial aneurysm endovascular intervention treatment based on an improved machine learning model.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 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.
- Artificial Intelligence for Intracranial Aneurysm Detection, Rupture-Risk Prediction, and Prognosis Evaluation: Recent Advances and Clinical Integration.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence for Cerebral Aneurysm Management: Integrating Imaging, Hemodynamics, and Clinical Decision Support.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Review
- Machine Learning for Predicting Thromboembolic Events Following Flow Diverter Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.Neurology and therapy · 2025Article
- Lattice innovative flow diverter with mechanical balloons: a new breakthrough and efficacy evaluation in the treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms.Frontiers in medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the clinical utility of improved machine learning models in predicting poor prognosis following endovascular intervention for intracranial aneurysms and to develop a corresponding visualization system. Methods: A total of 303 patients with intracranial aneurysms treated with endovascular intervention at four hospitals (FuShun County Zigong City People's Hospital, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Third People's Hospital of Yibin, The Sixth People's Hospital of Yibin) from January 2022 to September 2023 were selected. These patients were divided into a good prognosis group ( Results: In the training set, the improved machine learning model achieved a maximum F1 score of 0.8633 and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.9118. In the test set, the maximum F1 score was 0.7500, and the AUC was 0.8684. The model identified 10 key variables: age, hypertension, preoperative aneurysm rupture, Hunt-Hess grading, Fisher score, ASA grading, number of aneurysms, intraoperative use of etomidate, intubation upon leaving the operating room, and surgical time. These variables were consistent with the results of logistic multivariate analysis. Conclusions: The application of improved machine learning models for the analysis of patient clinical data can effectively predict the risk of poor prognosis following endovascular intervention for intracranial aneurysms at an early stage. This approach can assist in formulating intervention plans and ultimately improve patient 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.