SynthesisNeuroradiology2025
Can machine learning be a reliable tool for predicting hematoma progression following traumatic brain injury? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neuroradiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Optimizing Intubation Prediction in Pneumonia Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Machine Learning Algorithms.Pulmonary medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Prediction models for functional outcomes in prolonged disorders of consciousness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Pooled it
- The roles of radiomics and deep learning for automatic detection, stability assessment, and rupture risk prediction in intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review.European journal of medical research · 2025Pooled it
- Longitudinal Evolution of Radiomic Features in Radiation-Induced Necrosis During Follow-Up of Brain Metastases: A Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- AI-Assisted Brain Tumor MRI Reporting and Treatment-Planning Segmentation: A Retrospective Paired Workflow Evaluation.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Current applications of radiomics in neurotrauma.Neurosurgical review · 2026Review
- Predicting time-to-event outcomes in critically ill patients with intracerebral hemorrhage using machine learning.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a prognostic prediction model for patients with traumatic multiple fractures and hemorrhagic shock using an Automated Machine Learning framework: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPredicting hematoma progression in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is crucial for timely interventions and effective clinical management, as unchecked hematoma growth can lead to rapid neurological deterioration, increased intracranial pressure, and poor patient outcomes. Accurate risk assessment enables proactive therapeutic strategies, minimizing secondary brain damage and improving survival rates.
methodsThis study evaluated to assess the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms, including machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), in forecasting risk of hematoma progression. Comprehensive searches across Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed identified relevant studies, with data extracted on algorithm metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC).
results1,240 studies screened, five out of them met the inclusion criteria, evaluating various AI models. The meta-analysis revealed a pooled sensitivity and specificity was 0.76 [95% CI: 0.67-0.83], 0.84 [95% CI: 0.78-0.89], positive and negative likelihood ratio was 4.82 [95% CI: 3.51-6.61] 0.29 [95% CI: 0.21-0.39], diagnostic score was 2.82 [95% CI: 2.33-3.32], diagnostic odds ratio was16.85 [95% CI: 10.29-27.59] and an AUC of 0.88 [95% CI: 0.85-0.90]. Among the evaluated algorithms, XGBoost has the best predictive performance with an accuracy of 91%. Integrating radiomics and clinical features in these models considerably improved the predictive outcomes.
conclusionThe current results demonstrated the potential of AI-based models to improve hematoma progression prediction for TBI patients, thereby supporting more effective clinical decision-making. Further research should aim to standardize datasets and diversify patient populations to improve model applicability and reliability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40397134What 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.