ArticleSpinal cord2025
Utilization of machine learning algorithm in the prediction of rehospitalization during one-year post traumatic spinal cord injury.
Article in Spinal cord, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The application of artificial intelligence in the acute and sub-acute phases of spinal cord injury- a systematic review.Spinal cord · 2026Pooled it
- Machine Learning Models for Predicting In-Hospital Mortality and Pressure Ulcer Development following Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury; A Cross-sectional Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2026Review
- Article
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
STUDY
designRetrospective cohort study.
objectiveThe primary aim was to develop a machine learning (ML) model to predict rehospitalization during the first year of traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) and to identify top predictors using data obtained during initial rehabilitation. The secondary aim was to predict prolonged hospital stay among the rehospitalized group.
settingEighteen SCI Model Systems centers throughout the United States.
methodsData were retrieved from the National Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems Database. The participants were divided into 2 groups based on rehospitalization during the first year of injury. Those who experienced rehospitalization during first year were further grouped into prolonged stay (>75th quartile of the total length of stay) or non-prolonged stay. Variables considered in models included socio-demographic factors, clinical characteristics, and comorbidities.
resultsThe best performing classification models were Random Forest for predicting rehospitalization and Adaptive Boosting for prolonged stay. The most important predictors in both models were the degree of functional independence, American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) scores, age, days from injury to rehabilitation admission and body mass index. Additionally, for prolonged stays, pressure injury as a reason for rehospitalization was top predictor.
conclusionFunctional Independence Measure (FIM) and ASIA scores emerge as key predictors of both rehospitalizations and prolonged rehospitalizations. These findings may assist clinicians in patient risk assessment. Furthermore, the identification of pressure injury as a primary predictor for prolonged stays signifies a targeted focus on preventive measures for pressure injury-related rehospitalizations, offering a specific strategy to enhance patient care and 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.