ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
A machine learning model based on emergency clinical data predicting 3-day in-hospital mortality for stroke and trauma patients.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Predictive Modeling for Early Detection of Sepsis in Hospitalized Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Critical care explorations · 2025Pooled it
- Machine Learning-Based Classification of ICU-Acquired Neuromuscular Weakness: A Comparative Study in Survivors of Critical Illness.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Random Forest Machine Learning Matches Human Expert Accuracy in Trauma Severity Scoring.World journal of surgery · 2025Article
- Building a SHAP interpretable prediction model for stroke-associated pneumonia [stroke-associated pneumonia (SAP)] in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH).Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurately predicting the short-term in-hospital mortality risk for patients with stroke and TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury) is crucial for improving the quality of emergency medical care. Method: This study analyzed data from 2,125 emergency admission patients with stroke and traumatic brain injury at two Grade a hospitals in China from January 2021 to March 2024. LASSO regression was used for feature selection, and the predictive performance of logistic regression was compared with six machine learning algorithms. A 70:30 ratio was applied for cross-validation, and confidence intervals were calculated using the bootstrap method. Temporal validation was performed on the best-performing model. SHAP values were employed to assess variable importance. Results: The random forest algorithm excelled in predicting in-hospital 3-day mortality, achieving an AUC of 0.978 (95% CI: 0.966-0.986). Time series validation demonstrated the model's strong generalization capability, with an AUC of 0.975 (95% CI: 0.963-0.986). Key predictive factors in the final model included metabolic syndrome, NEWS2 score, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), whether surgery was performed, bowel movement status, potassium level (K), aspartate transaminase (AST) level, and temporal factors. SHAP value analysis further confirmed the significant contributions of these variables to the predictive outcomes. The random forest model developed in this study demonstrates good accuracy in predicting short-term in-hospital mortality rates for stroke and traumatic brain injury patients. The model integrates emergency scores, clinical signs, and key biochemical indicators, providing a comprehensive perspective for risk assessment. This approach, which incorporates emergency data, holds promise for assisting decision-making in clinical practice, thereby improving patient 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.