ArticlePloS one2025
Advanced predictive modeling for enhanced mortality prediction in ICU stroke patients using clinical data.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A multicenter machine learning model for predicting ICU mortality in mechanically ventilated patients: development and external validation.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Beyond NIHSS and neuroimaging: an interpretable gradient boosting model for predicting in-hospital mortality in ICU patients with acute ischemic stroke.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Enhanced prediction of ventilator-associated pneumonia in patients with traumatic brain injury using advanced machine learning techniques.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Stroke is second-leading cause of disability and death among adults. Approximately 17 million people suffer from a stroke annually, with about 85% being ischemic strokes. Predicting mortality of ischemic stroke patients in intensive care unit (ICU) is crucial for optimizing treatment strategies, allocating resources, and improving survival rates. Methods We acquired data on ICU ischemic stroke patients from MIMIC-IV database, including diagnoses, vital signs, laboratory tests, medications, procedures, treatments, and clinical notes. Stroke patients were randomly divided into training (70%, n=2441), test (15%, n=523), and validation (15%, n=523) sets. To address data imbalances, we applied Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE). We selected 30 features for model development, significantly reducing feature number from 1095 used in the best study. We developed a deep learning model to assess mortality risk and implemented several baseline machine learning models for comparison. Results XGB-DL model, combining XGBoost for feature selection and deep learning, effectively minimized false positives. Model's AUROC improved from 0.865 (95% CI: 0.821 - 0.905) on first day to 0.903 (95% CI: 0.868 - 0.936) by fourth day using data from 3,646 ICU mortality patients in the MIMIC-IV database with 0.945 AUROC (95% CI: 0.944-0.947) during training. Although other ML models also performed well in terms of AUROC, we chose Deep Learning for its higher specificity. Conclusion Through enhanced feature selection and data cleaning, proposed model demonstrates a 13% AUROC improvement compared to existing models while reducing feature number from 1095 in previous studies to 30.
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.