ArticlePloS one2026
Classification of recurrence status after surgical treatment of chronic subdural hemorrhage - A machine learning approach.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic subdural hematoma (cSDH) recurrence requiring reoperation occurs in 5-33% of cases. Predicting recurrence could enable risk-stratified surveillance, reducing imaging in low-risk patients while maintaining monitoring for high-risk individuals. We evaluated whether machine learning could achieve clinically actionable recurrence prediction using routinely available variables.
methodsThis retrospective single-center study included 564 consecutive patients undergoing surgical cSDH evacuation (2015-2023), randomly divided into training (75%, n = 422) and test (25%, n = 142) sets. We developed and compared three models, regularized logistic regression, Random Forest, and XGBoost, using 31 predictor variables. Model development and tuning used 10-fold cross-validation on the training set; the best model was evaluated on the held-out test set. The primary outcome was postoperative recurrence requiring reoperation.
resultsPostoperative recurrence occurred in 170 patients (30.1%). In the training set, XGBoost achieved the highest cross-validated ROC AUC (0.713, SE = 0.024), matching Random Forest and outperforming logistic regression (0.686). Hematoma volume, coagulation parameters, and disease severity markers (ICU admission, GCS) were the most influential predictors, though effect sizes remained modest. On the test set, the final XGBoost model achieved ROC AUC 0.688 (95% CI 0.590-0.772), with satisfactory average calibration but overconfident individual-level risk estimates (calibration slope 0.615). At the clinically relevant 90% sensitivity threshold, specificity was only 30.3%, allowing potential imaging reduction in roughly one-third of non-recurrence patients. Consistency between training and test performance indicated these limitations reflect predictor information content rather than overfitting.
conclusionsIn this single-center cohort, machine learning models using routinely available clinical and radiographic variables did not achieve clinically actionable risk stratification for cSDH recurrence under internal validation, with discriminative capacity insufficient to identify a low-risk subgroup suitable for de-escalated surveillance. These findings suggest recurrence is driven by factors not captured in standard clinical assessment, supporting uniform or symptom-driven imaging strategies over risk-stratified approaches.
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.