ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2025
Application of a time series foundation model to noninvasively estimate intracranial pressure.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) contributes to poor neurological outcomes in brain injured patients but relies on invasive approaches with inherent risks. ICP dynamics are closely related to cerebral blood flow velocity (CBFV) and arterial blood pressure (ABP). Data-driven, non-invasive techniques show promise but lack clinically acceptable accuracy and require large amounts of data. We used a pre-trained transformer-based foundation model (MOMENT) to generate embeddings from ABP and CBFV in two cohorts (a) Columbia University Irving Medical Center (CUIMC) (b) Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III (MIMIC). These embeddings were then used to train a stochastic gradient descent regressor for deriving non-invasive ICP (nICP). Model performance was evaluated using median absolute error (MAE) and Bland-Altman statistics, with leave-one-patient-out validation strategy for within-cohort testing. Further models trained in one cohort were validated on the other to assess generalizability. The CUIMC dataset included 11 patients with a median age of 56 years [IQR: 44–66], and ICP ranging from 0 to 39.8 mmHg. The MIMIC dataset included 11 patients, with a median age of 11 years [IQR: 6.7–17], and ICP ranging from 0 to 35.6 mmHg. The CUIMC-trained model achieved a median MAE of 3.4 mmHg [IQR: 2.54–5.69] on CUIMC dataset and 3.21 mmHg [IQR: 2.46–3.81] on MIMIC dataset. The MIMIC-trained model achieved a median MAE of 3.99 mmHg [IQR: 2.56–5.96] MIMIC dataset and 1.97 mmHg [IQR: 1.87–3.82] on CUIMC dataset. We present a framework for leveraging a time-series foundation model for deriving robust nICP measures across diverse patient populations.
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.