SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2023
Prediction performance of the machine learning model in predicting mortality risk in patients with traumatic brain injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The role of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and prognosis of traumatic brain injury based on brain CT scans: a systematic review.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Cognitive frailty risk prediction models in patients with chronic kidney disease in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC nephrology · 2026Pooled it
- A Meta-analysis of Predicting Disorders of Consciousness After Traumatic Brain Injury by Machine Learning Models.Alpha psychiatry · 2024Pooled it
- Risk prediction models for postherpetic neuralgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- Development and validation of a prognostic prediction model for patients with traumatic multiple fractures and hemorrhagic shock using an Automated Machine Learning framework: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- A novel CT-based edema grading system combined with machine learning for precise prognostic prediction in traumatic brain injury.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in traumatic brain injury: Brain imaging analysis and outcome prediction: A mini review.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Revolutionizing cross professional collaboration outcomes in TBI: emerging trends in diagnostics, personalized medicine, technological innovations and neurorehabilitation.Brain informatics · 2025Review
- Diagnostic Accuracy of the Madras Head Injury Prognostication Scale (MHIPS) in Predicting Mortality among Traumatic Brain Injury Patients.Asian journal of neurosurgery · 2025Article
- Developing practical machine learning survival models to identify high-risk patients for in-hospital mortality following traumatic brain injury.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- An algorithm to assess importance of predictors in systematic reviews of prediction models: a case study with simulations.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Probability density and information entropy of machine learning derived intracranial pressure predictions.PloS one · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence for traumatic brain injury imaging: a translational review from algorithm development to clinical implementation.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWith the in-depth application of machine learning(ML) in clinical practice, it has been used to predict the mortality risk in patients with traumatic brain injuries(TBI). However, there are disputes over its predictive accuracy. Therefore, we implemented this systematic review and meta-analysis, to explore the predictive value of ML for TBI. METHODOLOGY: We systematically retrieved literature published in PubMed, Embase.com, Cochrane, and Web of Science as of November 27, 2022. The prediction model risk of bias(ROB) assessment tool (PROBAST) was used to assess the ROB of models and the applicability of reviewed questions. The random-effects model was adopted for the meta-analysis of the C-index and accuracy of ML models, and a bivariate mixed-effects model for the meta-analysis of the sensitivity and specificity.
resultA total of 47 papers were eligible, including 156 model, with 122 newly developed ML models and 34 clinically recommended mature tools. There were 98 ML models predicting the in-hospital mortality in patients with TBI; the pooled C-index, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.86 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.87), 0.79 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.82), and 0.89 (95% CI: 0.86, 0.92), respectively. There were 24 ML models predicting the out-of-hospital mortality; the pooled C-index, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.83 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.85), 0.74 (95% CI: 0.67, 0.81), and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.66, 0.82), respectively. According to multivariate analysis, GCS score, age, CT classification, pupil size/light reflex, glucose, and systolic blood pressure (SBP) exerted the greatest impact on the model performance.
conclusionAccording to the systematic review and meta-analysis, ML models are relatively accurate in predicting the mortality of TBI. A single model often outperforms traditional scoring tools, but the pooled accuracy of models is close to that of traditional scoring tools. The key factors related to model performance include the accepted clinical variables of TBI and the use of CT imaging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.