ArticleScientific reports2024
An intelligent learning system based on electronic health records for unbiased stroke prediction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Predictive Performance of Artificial Intelligence Models for Stroke Risk Stratification: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingPooled it
- A single-site retrospective cohort on the profile of in-hospital stroke: an alarming sentinel of systemic failures.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 2026Article
- A hybrid approach for accurate skin lesion segmentation using LEDNet and Swin-UMamba.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Automated skin cancer detection using MedFusionNet with attention-based fusion of ConvNeXt and vision transformer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a stroke risk prediction model using regional healthcare big data and machine learning.International journal of nursing sciences · 2025Article
- Enhancing stroke risk prediction through class balancing and data augmentation with CBDA-ResNet50.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Enhanced machine learning and hybrid ensemble approaches for Coronary Heart Disease prediction.PloS one · 2025Article
- A multimodal deep learning model for predicting early neurological deterioration in patients with acute ischemic stroke.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2026-03-31Concerns/Issues about Data · Objections by Author(s) · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Stroke has a negative impact on people's lives and is one of the leading causes of death and disability worldwide. Early detection of symptoms can significantly help predict stroke and promote a healthy lifestyle. Researchers have developed several methods to predict strokes using machine learning (ML) techniques. However, the proposed systems have suffered from the following two main problems. The first problem is that the machine learning models are biased due to the uneven distribution of classes in the dataset. Recent research has not adequately addressed this problem, and no preventive measures have been taken. Synthetic Minority Oversampling (SMOTE) has been used to remove bias and balance the training of the proposed ML model. The second problem is to solve the problem of lower classification accuracy of machine learning models. We proposed a learning system that combines an autoencoder with a linear discriminant analysis (LDA) model to increase the accuracy of the proposed ML model for stroke prediction. Relevant features are extracted from the feature space using the autoencoder, and the extracted subset is then fed into the LDA model for stroke classification. The hyperparameters of the LDA model are found using a grid search strategy. However, the conventional accuracy metric does not truly reflect the performance of ML models. Therefore, we employed several evaluation metrics to validate the efficiency of the proposed model. Consequently, we evaluated the proposed model's accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC), and receiver operator characteristic (ROC). The experimental results show that the proposed model achieves a sensitivity and specificity of 98.51% and 97.56%, respectively, with an accuracy of 99.24% and a balanced accuracy of 98.00%.
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.