ArticleBrain communications2025
Predicting individual long-term prognosis of spatial neglect based on acute stroke patient data.
Article in Brain communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Early end-effector-based gait training in non-ambulatory patients with visuospatial neglect after subacute stroke.Frontiers in neurology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
One of the most pressing questions after a stroke is whether an individual patient will recover in the long term. Previous studies demonstrated that spatial neglect-a common cognitive deficit after right hemispheric stroke-is a strong predictor for poor performance on a wide range of everyday tasks and for resistance to rehabilitation. The possibility of predicting long-term prognosis of spatial neglect is therefore of great relevance. The aim of the present study was to test the prognostic value of different imaging and non-imaging features from right hemispheric stroke patients: individual demographics (age, sex), initial neglect severity and acute lesion information (size, location). Patients' behaviour was tested twice in the acute and the chronic phases of stroke and prediction models were built using machine learning-based algorithms with repeated nested cross-validation and feature selection. Model performances indicate that demographic information seemed less beneficial. The best variable combination comprised individual neglect severity in the acute phase of stroke, together with lesion location and size. The latter were based on individual lesion overlaps with a previously proposed chronic neglect region of interest that covers anterior parts of the superior and middle temporal gyri and the basal ganglia. These variables achieved a remarkably high level of accuracy by explaining 66% of the total variance of neglect patients, making them promising features in the prediction of individual outcome prognosis. An online tool is provided with which our algorithm can be used for individual outcome predictions (https://niivue.github.io/niivue-neglect/).
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.