ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
Artificial Intelligence in Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Current Applications and Future Perspectives.
Review in Journal of clinical 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) remains one of the most severe forms of stroke and is associated with high mortality, poor functional outcomes, and substantial healthcare burden worldwide. Despite advances in neurocritical care and minimally invasive surgical techniques, the management of ICH remains challenging because of disease heterogeneity, rapid neurological deterioration, and the lack of effective individualized treatment strategies. In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising tool for improving the diagnosis, prognostic evaluation, and precision management of ICH. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase to identify studies on AI applications in ICH, with predefined inclusion criteria focusing on imaging analysis, prognostic prediction, clinical decision support, and minimally invasive surgery. This review summarizes the major clinical applications, limitations, and future directions of AI in ICH, including multimodal foundation models, intelligent surgical assistance, and personalized precision care. Recent studies have demonstrated that AI-based models can significantly improve the accuracy of hematoma segmentation, hematoma expansion prediction, and functional outcome prognostication compared with conventional approaches. Despite encouraging progress, several important barriers continue to limit clinical translation, including data heterogeneity, limited external validation, insufficient interpretability, ethical and regulatory concerns, and challenges in workflow integration. Overall, AI has the potential to transform ICH management from conventional experience-based practice to data-driven, personalized, and precision neurosurgical 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.