ArticleNeurosurgical review2025
Multi-class subarachnoid hemorrhage severity prediction: addressing challenges in predicting rare outcomes.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Subarachnoid hemorrhage: epidemiology, risk factors, pathogenesis, and clinical therapies.Molecular biomedicine · 2026Review
- Epidemiology of Patients Coming With Subarachnoid Hemorrhage to a Tertiary Care Facility in the State of Qatar.Cureus · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurately predicting the severity of subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is critical for informing clinical decisions and improving patient outcomes. This study addresses the challenges of imbalanced data in SAH severity classification by employing the Modified Rankin Scale (MRS) within a three-stage classification framework. We utilize a three-stage approach to effectively categorize SAH severity. In the first stage, we performed binary classification, grouping SAH severity into "Good Outcome" (class 0), which includes MRS levels 0, 1, 2, and 3, and "Poor Outcome" (class 1), encompassing levels 4, 5, and 6. Feature selection was done using a Random Forest algorithm to identify the top 20 features for the SAH severity prediction. We evaluated thirteen machine learning models at each stage, selecting the top-performing classifiers to optimize results. The dataset comprised 535 samples across seven MRS severity levels and was validated using 5-fold cross-validation and diverse subgroups to ensure robust model performance across various scenarios. Binary classification in the first stage achieved approximately 90% accuracy with Extra Trees. In the second stage, targeting the "Good Outcome" group, the Random Forest model reached 88% accuracy, while in the third stage, it achieved 86% accuracy for the "Poor Outcome" group. By increasing accuracy across unbalanced classes and emphasizing its potential for practical use, the multi-stage technique presents a promising solution for predicting the severity of SAH. Future research will concentrate on additional tuning to improve the model's efficacy in actual healthcare environments.
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.