ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Clinically oriented dual-tier screening for post-stroke epilepsy with interpretable machine learning in a severely imbalanced cohort.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Post-stroke epilepsy is an important complication after stroke, yet its relatively low incidence makes early identification difficult in routine practice. This challenge is compounded by severe class imbalance, which may limit the clinical usefulness of conventional prediction models. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 21,459 patients with stroke, including 936 patients who developed post-stroke epilepsy. Candidate predictors underwent staged feature reduction, after which we developed an interpretable machine-learning framework using an imbalance-aware modeling strategy. Two clinically distinct models were defined within a dual-tier screening framework: a primary model for balanced risk stratification and a secondary model for sensitivity-prioritized alerting. Model interpretation was examined using SHAP. Results: The cohort showed marked class imbalance (approximately 21.9:1). The primary model achieved the most balanced overall performance, with a macro-area under the curve of 0.996, area under the precision-recall curve of 0.970, F1-score of 0.931, sensitivity of 0.907, and specificity of 0.998. The secondary alert model yielded higher sensitivity (0.971) with lower F1-score (0.854) and specificity (0.985), supporting its role as a high-sensitivity screening tool rather than a general prediction model. Key contributors included neurological severity, hypertension, lactate, D-dimer, and aspartate aminotransferase. Conclusion: In a severely imbalanced cohort, a clinically oriented dual-tier framework provided both balanced risk stratification and high-sensitivity alerting for post-stroke epilepsy. This approach may support decision-making in follow-up care, although external validation remains necessary.
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.