ArticleVascular health and risk management2026
Exploring a Prediction Model Based on Patient Record Data in Carotid Stenosis Risk Assessment.
Article in Vascular health and risk management, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Digitalised patient records represent a large potential source of real-world data. Nevertheless, confidentiality and data protection has made big data extraction from patient journals impossible in the past. Future options for free text reading by artificial intelligence might enable data extraction while maintaining confidentiality. In turn this could enable improvement in risk predictions. However, it remains unclear whether free-text data constitute an appropriate data source for this purpose, or whether this data source can be incorporated into a clinically applicable risk prediction tool using an appropriate statistical model. We aim to investigate this for stroke risk in patients with carotid stenosis. Methods: A test dataset of patients with carotid stenosis, based on free text data, was manually established. Parameters of choice were extracted from digital patient records to assess their performance in the prediction of individual risk profile. The dataset is applied to evaluate a proposed statistical model including time dependency of specific variables and multiple endpoint analysis, comparing this to the results from a traditional Cox regression analysis. Results: 392 symptomatic and 471 asymptomatic patients with carotid stenosis were included in the analysis, where respectively 49 repeat events and 56 first stroke events attributed to the carotid stenosis occurred. The suggested extended regression model shows a statistically significant risk of a high degree carotid stenosis lesion on the risk of an attributable stroke, which was not demonstrated by use of a traditional Cox regression analysis. For a stenosis of 70-99%, asymptomatic patients with a right sided carotid stenosis had a hazard ratio (HR) 4.98 for a right sided event, and for left sided carotid stenosis a HR 5.23 for a left sided event. Symptomatic patients were found to have a HR of 2.25 for a recurrent event, as many received protective treatment. This is suggested to imply improved risk prediction by an advanced statistical model. Discussion: In this article a description of the data set and the methods behind our model choice has been the main emphasis, in order to evaluate its suitability for this purpose. Analysis of model performance by concordance analysis and Brier score has been published in a separate article.
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.