ArticleFrontiers in genetics2025
An interpretable machine learning model for predicting myocardial injury in patients with high cervical spinal cord injury.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: High cervical spinal cord injury (HCSCI) is associated with severe autonomic dysfunction and an increased risk of cardiovascular complications, including myocardial injury. However, early identification of myocardial injury remains challenging because of the lack of predictive tools. Methods: A total of 454 patients with HCSCI were retrospectively enrolled and categorized into myocardial injury (n = 101) and non-injury (n = 353) groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify independent risk factors. Four machine learning (ML) models-logistic regression, gradient boosting machine (GBM), neural network (NeuralNetwork), and adaptive boosting (AdaBoost)-were constructed to predict myocardial injury, and model performance was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC), F1 score, and average precision (AP). SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) was applied for model interpretability. Results: Multivariate analysis identified dyspnea [odds ratio (OR) = 3.32; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.49-7.39] and low hematocrit (OR = 2.18; 95% CI: 1.04-4.57) as independent predictors of myocardial injury. Among the ML models, the neural network model achieved the highest AUC and F1 score in the testing set and demonstrated superior calibration and net clinical benefit. The SHAP analysis revealed that dyspnea, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), spinal cord segment level, paralysis status, hematocrit, and myocardial injury stage were the top predictors. Individualized SHAP force plots illustrated the contribution of each feature to prediction outcomes. Conclusion: We developed an interpretable ML model capable of accurately predicting myocardial injury in patients with HCSCI. The neural network model showed the best overall performance and, with SHAP interpretation, provided transparent and individualized risk insights, supporting early diagnosis and targeted management in clinical practice.
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.