ArticleNeurocritical care2025
A Novel, Interpretable Machine Learning Model to Predict Neurological Outcomes Following Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.
Article in Neurocritical care, 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.
- A Review of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Patients on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Scoping Review Study.Health science reports · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe used machine learning models incorporating rich electronic medical record (EMR) data to predict neurological outcomes after venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO).
methodsThis was a retrospective review of adult (≥ 18 years) patients undergoing VA-ECMO between 6/2016 and 4/2022 at a single center. The primary outcome was good neurological outcome, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 3, evaluated at hospital discharge. We extracted every measurement of 74 vital and laboratory values, as well as circuit and ventilator settings, from 24 h before cannulation through the entire duration of ECMO. An XGBoost model with Shapley Additive Explanations was developed and evaluated with leave-one-out cross-validation.
resultsOverall, 194 patients undergoing VA-ECMO (median age 58 years, 63% male) were included. We extracted more than 14 million individual data points from the EMR. Of 194 patients, 39 patients (20%) had good neurological outcomes. Three models were generated: model A, which contained only pre-ECMO data; model B, which added data from the first 48 h of ECMO; and model C, which included data from the entire ECMO run. The leave-one-out cross-validation area under the receiver operator characteristics curves for models A, B, and C were 0.72, 0.81, and 0.90, respectively. The inclusion of on-ECMO physiologic, laboratory, and circuit data greatly improved model performance. Both modifiable and nonmodifiable variables, such as lower body mass index, lower age, higher mean arterial pressure, and higher hemoglobin, were associated with good neurological outcome.
conclusionsAn interpretable machine learning model from EMR-extracted data was able to predict neurological outcomes for patients undergoing VA-ECMO with excellent accuracy.
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.