Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39853510›Full record

SynthesisNeurosurgical review2025

Prediction of facial nerve outcomes after surgery for vestibular schwannoma using machine learning-based models: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Bardia Hajikarimloo, Ibrahim Mohammadzadeh, Mohammad Ali Nazari, Mohammad Amin Habibi, Pourya Taghipour, Seyyed-Ali Alaei, Amirreza Khalaji, Rana Hashemi, Salem M Tos

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
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

9 authors.

Bardia Hajikarimloo *Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA. bardii47@yahoo.com.
Ibrahim Mohammadzadeh *Skull Base Research Center, Loghman-Hakim Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad Ali NazariStudent Research Committee, Faculty of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad Amin HabibiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Pourya TaghipourFaculty of Medicine, Mersin University, Mersin, Türkiye, Turkey.
Seyyed-Ali AlaeiSchool of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Amirreza KhalajiDepartment of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Lowance Center for Human Immunology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Rana HashemiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Shohada Tajrish Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Salem M TosDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA. salem.m.97@hotmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Postoperative facial nerve (FN) dysfunction is associated with a significant impact on the quality of life of patients and can result in psychological stress and disorders such as depression and social isolation. Preoperative prediction of FN outcomes can play a critical role in vestibular schwannomas (VSs) patient care. Several studies have developed machine learning (ML)-based models in predicting FN outcomes following resection of VS. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ML-based models in predicting FN outcomes following resection in the setting of VS. On December 12, 2024, the four electronic databases, Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science, were systematically searched. Studies that evaluated the performance outcomes of the ML-based predictive models were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated through the R program. Five studies with 807 individuals with VS, encompassing 35 models, were included. The meta-analysis showed a pooled sensitivity of 82% (95%CI: 76-87%), specificity of 79% (95%CI: 74-84%), and DOR of 12.94 (95%CI: 8.65-19.34) with an AUC of 0.841. The meta-analysis of the best performance model demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 91% (95%CI: 80-96%), specificity of 87% (95%CI: 82-91%), and DOR of 46.84 (95%CI: 19.8-110.8). Additionally, the analysis demonstrated an AUC of 0.92, a sensitivity of 0.884, and a false positive rate of 0.136 for the best performance models. ML-based models possess promising diagnostic accuracy in predicting FN outcomes following resection.

Indexed as

Facial NerveFacial Nerve InjuriesMachine LearningNeuroma, AcousticNeurosurgical ProceduresPostoperative ComplicationsHumansTreatment OutcomeDeep learningFacial nerveMachine learningNeural networkVestibular schwannoma

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.