Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41888711›Full record

SynthesisBMC neurology2026

Machine learning in the diagnosis and prognosis of transient ischaemic attack: a systematic review.

Kishan Desor, Ahmed Elmewafy, Eyad Jamileh, Aref Jalal Eldin, Ibrahim Antoun

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Kishan DesorSchool of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, England, UK.
Ahmed ElmewafySchool of Medicine, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England, UK.
Eyad JamilehDepartment of Medicine, Royal Blackburn Teaching Hospital, East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust, Blackburn, England.
Aref Jalal EldinFaculty of Medicine, Latakia University, Latakia, Syria. aref.jalaleldin@latakia-univ.edu.sy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-1123-2456
Ibrahim AntounDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK. ia277@leicester.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransient ischaemic attack (TIA) is a major risk factor for stroke, with up to 15% of patients experiencing an event within 90 days, a large proportion in the first 48 h. Accurate diagnosis and prognostic stratification remain challenging due to transient symptoms, lack of biomarkers, and limitations of traditional clinical scores. Machine learning (ML) holds the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy, risk prediction, and prognosis by harnessing complex clinical, imaging, and electronic health record data.

methodsPubMed was searched from January 2000 to the present. Studies reporting the association between ML models and TIA prognosis and diagnosis were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the PROBAST tool. Data were synthesised narratively due to heterogeneity in outcomes and methodologies.

resultsA total of 10 studies were included. ML models demonstrated good discriminatory ability in diagnosing TIA compared with healthy controls. However, performance declined in metabolically complex subgroups and when distinguishing TIAs from stroke mimics. Three studies developed risk prediction models using electronic health records or CTA radiomics, with best-performing models achieving AUCs of 0.82–0.88. Studies that assessed prognostic outcomes consistently outperformed logistic regression, achieving AUCs of 0.77–0.94.

conclusionsML models show promise in enhancing TIA diagnosis, risk prediction, and prognostication, frequently outperforming traditional clinical scores and statistical methods. However, most studies lacked external validation, used heterogeneous endpoints, and provided limited interpretability. Future work should prioritise larger prospective cohorts, standardised outcome definitions, model explainability, and evaluation of real-world clinical impact. PROSPERO ID: CRD420251123717

Indexed as

Ischemic Attack, TransientMachine LearningHumansPredictive Learning ModelsPrognosisArtificial intelligenceCerebrovascular eventMachine learningStrokeTransient ischaemic attack

Identifiers

PMID41888711
PMCPMC13141325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.