ArticleBrain & spine2026
Prognostic value of early intracranial pressure curve following surgical decompression: A machine learning analysis.
Article in Brain & spine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intracranial pressure (ICP) control is a critical determinant of successful therapy following decompressive craniectomy (DC). While traditional assessments have focused on peak or mean ICP values, the prognostic relevance of continuously quantified ICP burden using the area under the curve (ICP-AUC) remains underexplored. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of early postoperative ICP dynamics within the first 72 h using ICP-AUC based analysis and to assess predictive performance through machine learning models. Methods: Seventeen patients who underwent DC were included in this retrospective analysis. ICP was continuously recorded over a 72-h period after DC was performed. We calculated normalized ICP-AUC, maximum ICP values, and the ICP-AUC above thresholds was calculated separately based on baseline ICP values of 15 mmHg and 20 mmHg, respectively. Neurological outcomes were assessed using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at discharge. A poor outcome was defined as mRS = 6 (death). Results: A normalized ICP-AUC ≥0.5 was significantly associated with poor outcomes at discharge (Spearman r = 0.50, Conclusion: Early cumulative ICP burden, assessed through ICP-AUC, might provide a reliable prognostic marker for neurological outcomes following DC. Machine learning enhances predictive accuracy and offers a promising approach for clinical decision support in neurocritical care.
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.