ArticlePloS one2025
Convolutional neural network using magnetic resonance brain imaging to predict outcome from tuberculosis meningitis.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTuberculous meningitis (TBM) leads to high mortality, especially amongst individuals with HIV. Predicting the incidence of disease-related complications is challenging, for which purpose the value of brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has not been well investigated. We used a convolutional neural network (CNN) to explore the complementary contribution of brain MRI to the conventional prognostic determinants.
methodsWe pooled data from two randomised control trials of HIV-positive and HIV-negative adults with clinical TBM in Vietnam to predict the occurrence of death or new neurological complications in the first two months after the subject's first MRI session. We developed and compared three models: a logistic regression with clinical, demographic and laboratory data as reference, a CNN that utilised only T1-weighted MRI volumes, and a model that fused all available information. All models were fine-tuned using two repetitions of 5-fold cross-validation. The final evaluation was based on a random 70/30 training/test split, stratified by the outcome and HIV status. Based on the selected model, we explored the interpretability maps derived from the models.
results215 patients were included, with an event prevalence of 22.3%. On the test set our non-imaging model had higher AUC (71.2% [Formula: see text] 1.1%) than the imaging-only model (67.3% [Formula: see text] 2.6%). The fused model was superior to both, with an average AUC = 77.3% [Formula: see text] 4.0% in the test set. The non-imaging variables were more informative in the HIV-positive group, while the imaging features were more predictive in the HIV-negative group. All three models performed better in the HIV-negative cohort. The interpretability maps show the model's focus on the lateral fissures, the corpus callosum, the midbrain, and peri-ventricular tissues.
conclusionImaging information can provide added value to predict unwanted outcomes of TBM. However, to confirm this finding, a larger dataset is needed.
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.