ArticleNeurocritical care2026
A Machine Learning Model to Predict Treatment Effect Associated with Targeted Temperature Management After Cardiac Arrest.
Article in Neurocritical care, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTargeted temperature management (TTM) has been associated with neurological recovery among comatose survivors of cardiac arrest. The aim of this study is to determine whether models leveraging acute phase multimodal data after intensive care unit admission (hyperacute phase) can predict short-term outcome after TTM.
methodsClinical, physiologic, and laboratory data in the hyperacute phase were analyzed from adult patients receiving TTM after cardiac arrest. Primary end points were survival and favorable neurological outcome. Three machine learning algorithms were trained: generalized linear models, random forest, and gradient boosting. Models with optimal features from forward selection were tenfold cross-validated and resampled 10 times.
resultsThe generalized linear model performed best, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ± standard deviation of 0.86 ± 0.04 for the prediction of survival and 0.85 ± 0.03 for the prediction of favorable neurological outcome. Features most predictive of both end points included lower serum chloride concentration, higher serum pH, and greater neutrophil counts.
conclusionsWe found that in patients receiving TTM after cardiac arrest, short-term outcomes can be accurately determined using machine learning applied to data routinely collected in the first 12 h after intensive care unit admission. With validation, hyperacute prediction could enable personalized decision-making in the postcardiac arrest setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40490603What 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.