Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42011454›Full record

ArticleCureus2026

Development of a Gait Independence Prediction Model in Patients With Stroke in a Convalescent Rehabilitation Ward: A Comparison of Decision Tree and Random Forest Models.

Shogo Nakao, Tsuyoshi Motokawa, Takashi Nakamori

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 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

3 authors.

Shogo NakaoDepartment of Rehabilitation, Okanami General Hospital, Mie, JPN.
Tsuyoshi MotokawaDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Toyota Memorial Hospital, Toyota, JPN.
Takashi NakamoriDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Kansai University of Health Sciences, Osaka, JPN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimIn this study, we aimed to examine the clinical utility of a classification and regression tree (CART) model for predicting independent ambulation at discharge based on physical function at admission to a convalescent rehabilitation ward, by comparing its performance with that of a random forest (RF) model. Seventy-three patients with stroke admitted to a convalescent rehabilitation ward were included.

methodsIndependent ambulation at discharge was defined using the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) locomotion item (walk/wheelchair): patients with a score ≥6 and ambulation as the primary mode of mobility were classified as independent, whereas those with a score <6 or wheelchair use as the primary mode of mobility were classified as nonindependent. The dataset was randomly divided into training (70%) and validation (30%) sets, and CART and RF models were developed using the training data and evaluated using the validation data.

resultsIn the CART model, patients with a Trunk Impairment Scale (TIS) score <9 were classified as gait-independent when the FIM cognitive score was ≥30.5. Among patients with a TIS score ≥9, those aged <76.5 years were classified as independent, whereas those aged ≥76.5 years were classified as independent when the FIM cognitive score was ≥22.5. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.832 and 0.856 for the CART and RF models, respectively, with no significant difference between the two models according to the DeLong test (p = 0.58).

conclusionThese findings suggest that the CART model demonstrates discriminative ability comparable to that of the RF model and can hierarchically visualize the likelihood of gait independence based on admission assessments, thereby supporting clinical decision-making and intervention planning in convalescent rehabilitation wards.

Indexed as

classification and regression treeconvalescent rehabilitation wardgait independencerandom foreststroke

Identifiers

PMID42011454
PMCPMC13092079

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.