ArticleResuscitation2025
Automated detection of severe cerebral edema using explainable deep transfer learning after hypoxic ischemic brain injury.
Article in Resuscitation, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSubstantial gaps exist in the neuroprognostication of cardiac arrest patients who remain comatose after the restoration of spontaneous circulation. Most studies focus on predicting survival, a measure confounded by the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment decisions. Severe cerebral edema (SCE) may serve as an objective proximal imaging-based surrogate of neurologic injury.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed data from 288 patients to automate SCE detection with machine learning (ML) and to test the hypothesis that the quantitative values produced by these algorithms (ML_SCE) can improve predictions of neurologic outcomes. Ground-truth SCE (GT_SCE) classification was based on radiology reports.
resultsThe model attained a cross-validated testing accuracy of 87% [95% CI: 84%, 89%] for detecting SCE. Attention maps explaining SCE classification focused on cisternal regions (p < 0.05). Multivariable analyses showed that older age (p < 0.001), non-shockable initial cardiac rhythm (p = 0.004), and greater ML_SCE values (p < 0.001) were significant predictors of poor neurologic outcomes, with GT_SCE (p = 0.064) as a non-significant covariate.
conclusionOur results support the feasibility of automated SCE detection. Future prospective studies with standardized neurologic assessments are needed to substantiate the utility of quantitative ML_SCE values to improve neuroprognostication.
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.