ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2025
Explainable machine learning for neurological outcome prediction in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors undergoing targeted temperature management: a multi-cohort validation study.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEarly risk assessment in comatose survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains clinically challenging, particularly for patients undergoing targeted temperature management (TTM). This study aimed to develop and externally validate an interpretable machine learning model to predict neurological outcomes in TTM-treated comatose OHCA survivors, leveraging multinational registry data to improve generalizability and early-phase characterization.
methodsData were derived from two multi-center registries: the Korean Hypothermia Network prospective registry (KORHN-pro, n = 1,050) and the Taiwan Network of Targeted Temperature Management for Cardiac Arrest (TIMECARD, n = 393). Adult OHCA patients who remained comatose after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) were included. The KORHN-pro dataset was used for model development and internal validation via 10-fold cross-validation, while the TIMECARD registry served as an independent external validation cohort. The primary outcome was a favorable neurological status (Cerebral Performance Category score 1-2) at hospital discharge. Eighteen pre-intervention variables were used to train seven machine learning algorithms. The best-performing model was selected based on discrimination metrics. Model interpretability was evaluated using Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to examine feature importance, interaction effects, and case-level predictions.
resultsThe eXtreme Gradient Boosting algorithm achieved the highest performance, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.925 in internal and 0.852 in external validation. Key predictive determinants included initial shockable rhythm, time to ROSC, adrenaline dose, and Glasgow Coma Scale motor score. SHAP analysis highlighted synergistic effects among features, particularly between cardiac rhythm and early neurological status, which were further illustrated through case-level explanations in the external validation cohort.
conclusionThis study presents an interpretable machine learning model for early neurological stratification in comatose OHCA survivors undergoing TTM. Using multinational registry data, the model demonstrated robust performance across both development and external validation cohorts. By integrating clinically relevant predictors, this approach provides individualized estimates to support early assessment and guide future therapeutic considerations. Notably, this study was not designed to compare different TTM temperature strategies, and results should not be interpreted in that context. The explainable framework is intended to complement clinical evaluation without replacing physician judgment or informing treatment withdrawal decisions.
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.