ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2025
Predicting internal carotid artery system risk based on common carotid artery by machine learning.
Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early identification of internal carotid artery (ICA) system diseases is critical for preventing stroke and other cerebrovascular events. Traditional diagnostic methods rely heavily on clinician expertise and costly imaging, limiting accessibility. This study aims to develop an interpretable machine learning (ML) model using common carotid artery (CCA) features to predict ICA disease risk, enabling efficient screening. Clinical data from 1612 patients (806 high-risk vs. 806 low-risk ICA disease) were analyzed. CCA features-blood flow, intima-media thickness, internal diameter, age, and gender-were used to train five ML models. Model performance was evaluated via accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, AUC-ROC, and F1 score. SHAP analysis identified key predictors. The support vector machine (SVM) achieved optimal performance (accuracy, 84.9%; AUC, 92.6%), outperforming neural networks (accuracy, 81.4%; AUC, 89.8%). SHAP analysis revealed CCA blood flow (negative correlation) and intima-media thickness (positive correlation) as dominant predictors. This study demonstrates that CCA hemodynamic and structural features, combined with interpretable ML models, can effectively predict ICA disease risk. The SVM-based framework offers a cost-effective screening tool for early intervention, particularly in resource-limited settings. Future work will validate these findings in multi-center cohorts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40658182What 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.