ArticleCritical care medicine2026
Explainable Machine Learning for Coma Outcome Prediction Based on Structural and Functional Brain MRI.
Article in Critical care medicine, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAdvanced MRI is recommended for the clinical evaluation of patients with coma. However, the implementation of these guidelines has been hindered by an inadequate identification of relevant markers among the vast amount of reported MRI-derived metrics. We developed and validated an innovative and explainable machine learning (ML) analytical pipeline to fill this critical knowledge gap.
designProspective cross-sectional study.
settingThree Intensive Critical Care Units affiliated to the University in Toulouse (France). PATIENTS: Patients with coma (Glasgow Coma Scale score at the hospital admission ≤ 9) from either traumatic or anoxic origin. Patient's neurologic outcome was assessed at 3 months by using the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised. Whole-brain advanced structural MRI data and functional connectivity analysis of resting-state networks known to contribute to conscious processing. A specifically designed ensemble of explainable ML methods was applied and cross-validated.
interventionsNone. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN
resultsOverall, 64 patients with coma due to either traumatic ( n = 26) or anoxic ( n = 38) brain injuries were studied and compared with 55 controls. The median delay between ICU admission and MRI scan was 9 days (interquartile range, 6-16 d). At 3 months, 50% patients (32/64) had an unfavorable outcome. All the models showed valuable generalization capacities: coma diagnosis (mean accuracy, 0.934%), primary brain injury discrimination (mean accuracy, 0.762 %), and neurologic outcome prediction (mean accuracy, 0.824 %).
conclusionsA new ensemble of brain MRI-derived metrics was specifically related to coma state, its etiology, and the patient's potential for recovery at 3 months. The structural and functional integrity of mesocircuit and frontoparietal networks appeared to carry the most relevant information.
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.