Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36071452›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2022

Cross-validation of predictive models for functional recovery after post-stroke rehabilitation.

Silvia Campagnini, Piergiuseppe Liuzzi, Andrea Mannini, Benedetta Basagni, Claudio Macchi, Maria Chiara Carrozza, Francesca Cecchi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Silvia CampagniniThe Biorobotics Institute, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Viale Rinaldo Piaggio 34, 56025, Pontedera, Italy.
Piergiuseppe LiuzziThe Biorobotics Institute, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Viale Rinaldo Piaggio 34, 56025, Pontedera, Italy.
Andrea ManniniIRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus, Via di Scandicci 269, 50143, Florence, Italy. amannini@dongnocchi.it.
Benedetta BasagniIRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus, Via di Scandicci 269, 50143, Florence, Italy.
Claudio MacchiIRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus, Via di Scandicci 269, 50143, Florence, Italy.
Maria Chiara Carrozza *The Biorobotics Institute, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Viale Rinaldo Piaggio 34, 56025, Pontedera, Italy.
Francesca Cecchi *IRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus, Via di Scandicci 269, 50143, Florence, Italy.
Don Carlo Gnocchi Foundation · ITPiaggio Aerospace (Italy) · ITScuola Superiore Sant'Anna · ITUniversity of Florence · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRehabilitation treatments and services are essential for the recovery of post-stroke patients' functions; however, the increasing number of available therapies and the lack of consensus among outcome measures compromises the possibility to determine an appropriate level of evidence. Machine learning techniques for prognostic applications offer accurate and interpretable predictions, supporting the clinical decision for personalised treatment. The aim of this study is to develop and cross-validate predictive models for the functional prognosis of patients, highlighting the contributions of each predictor.

methodsA dataset of 278 post-stroke patients was used for the prediction of the class transition, obtained from the modified Barthel Index. Four classification algorithms were cross-validated and compared. On the best performing model on the validation set, an analysis of predictors contribution was conducted.

resultsThe Random Forest obtained the best overall results on the accuracy (76.2%), balanced accuracy (74.3%), sensitivity (0.80), and specificity (0.68). The combination of all the classification results on the test set, by weighted voting, reached 80.2% accuracy. The predictors analysis applied on the Support Vector Machine, showed that a good trunk control and communication level, and the absence of bedsores retain the major contribution in the prediction of a good functional outcome.

conclusionsDespite a more comprehensive assessment of the patients is needed, this work paves the way for the implementation of solutions for clinical decision support in the rehabilitation of post-stroke patients. Indeed, offering good prognostic accuracies for class transition and patient-wise view of the predictors contributions, it might help in a personalised optimisation of the patients' rehabilitation path.

Indexed as

StrokeStroke RehabilitationHumansMachine LearningRecovery of FunctionSupport Vector MachineMachine learningPredictive modelsPrognosisRehabilitationStroke

Identifiers

PMID36071452
PMCPMC9454118
OpenAlexW4294884191

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.