SynthesisAlpha psychiatry2024
A Meta-analysis of Predicting Disorders of Consciousness After Traumatic Brain Injury by Machine Learning Models.
Synthesis in Alpha psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- To Do or Not to Do: Decompressive Craniectomy for Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.Asian journal of neurosurgery · 2026Review
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
Objective: This study pursued a meta-analysis to evaluate the predictive accuracy of machine learning (ML) models in determining disorders of consciousness (DOC) among patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify ML applications in the establishment of a predictive model of DOC after TBI as of August 6, 2023. Two independent reviewers assessed publication eligibility based on predefined criteria. The predictive accuracy was measured using areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs). Subsequently, a random-effects model was employed to estimate the overall effect size, and statistical heterogeneity was determined based on Results: Final analyses incorporated a total of 46 studies. Both the overall and subgroup analyses exhibited considerable statistical heterogeneity. Machine learning predictions for DOC in TBI yielded an overall pooled AUC of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.82-0.84). Subgroup analysis based on age revealed that the ML model in pediatric patients yielded an overall combined AUC of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.80-0.95); among the model subgroups, logistic regression was the most frequently employed, with an overall pooled AUC of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.83-0.87). In the clinical outcome subgroup analysis, the overall pooled AUC for distinguishing between consciousness recovery and consciousness disorders was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.85). Conclusion: The findings of this meta-analysis demonstrated outstanding accuracy of ML models in predicting DOC among patients with brain injuries, which presented substantial research value and potential of ML application in this domain.
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.