Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41146217›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2025

Can machine learning improve on the early prediction of upper limb recovery after stroke?

G J van der Gun, C G M Meskers, E R Andrinopoulou, E Grauwmeijer, L Hoogendam, E E H van Wegen, ICAI Stroke Lab, G Kwakkel, R W Selles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

G J van der GunDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands. g.vandergun@erasmusmc.nl.
C G M MeskersDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
E R AndrinopoulouDepartment of Biostatistics, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
E GrauwmeijerDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
L HoogendamDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Hand Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
E E H van WegenDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
ICAI Stroke Lab
G Kwakkel *Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
R W Selles *Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.

Funding

Dutch Brain Foundation F2011(1)-25Dutch Society of Physical Therapy 33368European Research Council 291339Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development 89000001ROBUST: Trustworthy AI-based Systems for Sutainable Growth LTP KIC 2020-2023
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly prediction of upper limb recovery is important to optimise rehabilitation and inform patients but remains challenging due to inter-individual variability. This study aims to (1) develop and validate a machine learning model to predict arm-hand capacity at six months post-stroke using clinical variables from the first week; (2) compare its performance to a mixed-effects model; and (3) co-design a user-friendly output visualisation with clinician input.

methodsFrom data of 451 first-ever ischemic stroke patients, we selected total Action Research Arm Test score (ARAT), shoulder abduction, and finger extension as predictors. An XGBoost model was trained on these variables measured at varying time points within the first five months, using 5-fold, 5-repeat cross-validation. We employed bootstrap aggregation to obtain generalisable predictions and prediction intervals to quantify uncertainty. The model's performance was validated on a hold-out set and compared against a mixed-effects model using median absolute error (MedAE).

resultsThe XGBoost model achieved a MedAE of 4.2 points (IQR = [1.2, 12.6]) on the ARAT when applied at seven days post-stroke, compared to 13.7 points (IQR = [4.6, 27.8]) for the mixed-effects model in the same patients.

conclusionOur model provides significantly more accurate predictions of upper limb recovery, with a 69% error reduction compared to the mixed-effects model. Its ease of use, interpretability, and use of routinely collected clinical data make it suitable for digital clinical workflows. Future research could validate the model in larger, more recent cohorts and explore integrating neuroimaging and temporal features.

Indexed as

Ischemic StrokeMachine LearningRecovery of FunctionStrokeStroke RehabilitationUpper ExtremityAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedArtificial intelligencePrognosisRecoveryStrokeUpper limb

Identifiers

PMID41146217
PMCPMC12557897

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.