ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Predicting functional outcomes of patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage based on explainable machine learning models: a multicenter retrospective study.
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 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.
- Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Poor Outcomes in Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Brain and behavior · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence for Cerebral Aneurysm Management: Integrating Imaging, Hemodynamics, and Clinical Decision Support.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH) is the second most common cause of cerebrovascular disease after ischemic stroke, with high mortality and disability rates, imposing a significant economic burden on families and society. This retrospective study aimed to develop and evaluate an interpretable machine learning model to predict functional outcomes 3 months after SICH. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on clinical data from 380 patients with SICH who were hospitalized at three different centers between June 2020 and June 2023. Seventy percent of the samples were randomly selected as the training set, while the remaining 30% were used as the validation set. Univariate analysis, Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression, and Pearson correlation analysis were used to screen clinical variables. The selected variables were then incorporated into five machine learning models: complementary naive bayes (CNB), support vector machine (SVM), gaussian naive bayes (GNB), multilayer perceptron (MLP), and extreme gradient boosting (XGB), to assess their performance. Additionally, the area under the curve (AUC) values were evaluated to compare the performance of each algorithmic model, and global and individual interpretive analyses were conducted using importance ranking and Shapley additive explanations (SHAP). Results: Among the 380 patients, 95 ultimately had poor prognostic outcomes. In the validation set, the AUC values for CNB, SVM, GNB, MLP, and XGB models were 0.899 (0.816-0.979), 0.916 (0.847-0.982), 0.730 (0.602-0.857), 0.913 (0.834-0.986), and 0.969 (0.937-0.998), respectively. Therefore, the XGB model performed the best among the five algorithms. SHAP analysis revealed that the GCS score, hematoma volume, blood pressure changes, platelets, age, bleeding location, and blood glucose levels were the most important variables for poor prognosis. Conclusion: The XGB model developed in this study can effectively predict the risk of poor prognosis in patients with SICH, helping clinicians make personalized and rational clinical decisions. Prognostic risk in patients with SICH is closely associated with GCS score, hematoma volume, blood pressure changes, platelets, age, bleeding location, and blood glucose levels.
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.