ArticleBMC neurology2026
The predictive value of serological markers for successful weaning and 30-day mortality in patients with severe intracerebral hemorrhage.
Article 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.
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
aimThis study intends to screen serological indicators related to weaning outcomes and 30-day mortality in severe intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients, use machine learning (ML) algorithms to construct predictive models, and explore their predictive value.
methodsData for this study were derived from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-IV database, which was divided into training and testing sets at a 7:3 ratio. Random Forest (RF) feature importance ranking was used to evaluate feature importance. Nine ML algorithms were applied to construct predictive models for successful weaning/30-day mortality.
resultsA total of 1,058 participants were enrolled in this study, among whom 242 achieved successful weaning. In the testing set, among the 9 ML models for predicting successful weaning, extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) showed the best predictive performance, with an AUC of 0.580, an accuracy of 0.582, a sensitivity of 0.522, and a specificity of 0.598. Among the 9 ML models for predicting 30-day mortality, RF showed the best predictive performance, with an AUC of 0.693, an accuracy of 0.642, a sensitivity of 0.627, and a specificity of 0.656. In the DCA curve for predicting successful weaning, within the threshold range of 20%-30%, the clinical net benefits of Decision Tree (DT), Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM), Support Vector Machine (SVM), XGBoost, and Ridge were all higher than those of the "treat all" and "treat none" models.
conclusionXGBoost and RF exhibited relatively better performance among tested models in predicting successful weaning and 30-day mortality, respectively. Weight, glucose, WBC, MCHC, and temperature were the five key influencing factors for successful weaning. Age, APS III, glucose, WBC, and LODS were the most critical prognostic factors for 30-day mortality. This study provides a concise and practical reference tool for clinical risk stratification and decision-making.
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.