ArticlePloS one2026
Explainable machine learning for predicting activities of daily living at discharge in stroke patients: A retrospective study using SHAP interpretability.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to develop a machine learning model to predict activities of daily living (ADL) at discharge in stroke patients and identify key predictors to guide rehabilitation decisions. MATERIALS AND
methodsData of 589 stroke inpatients (2019-2024) were split into good (BI ≥ 60) and poor (BI < 60) ADL groups. Continuous variables were processed using Z-score normalization, followed by preliminary univariate regression screening (P < 0.05) and final feature selection via LASSO regression (lambda.1se = 0.0488). The screened features were used to train and validate ten machine learning algorithms; 30% of the dataset (n = 177) was allocated as an independent test set for model evaluation, and SHAP analysis was performed to interpret the optimal model.
resultsSix of 41 features were retained. Random forest achieved the best performance (AUC = 0.958; accuracy = 0.936; sensitivity = 0.934; specificity = 0.950). SHAP identified the top drivers: admission Barthel Index, standing balance, Brunnstrom stages (upper and lower limb), dressing, and grooming abilities.
conclusionThe ADL risk prediction model constructed using machine learning, particularly the random forest model, shows excellent predictive performance and clinical interpretability, making it valuable for individualized risk assessment of daily living skills in stroke patients at discharge.
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.