ArticleJMIR medical informatics2026
Deep Learning for Dynamic Prognostic Prediction in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Model Development and Validation Study.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe pathological and physiological state of patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) after minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is a dynamic evolution, and the traditional models cannot dynamically predict prognosis. Clinical data at multiple time points often show the characteristics of different categories, different numbers, and missing data. The existing models lack methods to deal with imbalanced data.
objectiveThis study aims to develop and validate a dynamic prognostic model using multi-time point data from patients with ICH undergoing MIS to predict survival and functional outcomes.
methodsIn this study, 287 patients who underwent MIS for ICH were retrospectively collected on the day of surgery, days 1, 3, 7, and 14 after surgery, and the day of drainage tube removal. Their general information, vital signs, laboratory test findings, neurological function scores, head hematoma volume, and MIS-related indicators were collected. In addition, this study proposes a multistep attention model, namely the MultiStep Transformer. The model can simultaneously output 3 types of prediction probabilities for 30-day survival probability, 180-day survival probability, and 180-day favorable functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0-3) probability. Five-fold cross-validation was used to evaluate the performance of the model and compare it with mainstream models and traditional scores. The main evaluation indexes included accuracy, precision, recall, and F
resultsThe 30‑day survival rate, 180‑day survival rate, and 180‑day favorable functional outcome rate among 287 patients were 92.3%, 88.8%, and 52.3%, respectively. In terms of predictive efficacy for survival and functional outcomes, the MultiStep Transformer model showed a remarkable superiority over traditional scoring systems and other deep learning models. For these three outcomes, the model achieved areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) of 0.87 (95% CI 0.82-0.92), 0.85 (95% CI 0.77-0.93), and 0.75 (95% CI 0.72-0.78), with corresponding Brier scores of 0.1041, 0.1115, and 0.231. DCA confirmed that the model provided a definite clinical net benefit when threshold probabilities ranged within 0.06-0.26, 0.04-0.5, and 0.21-0.71.
conclusionsThe MultiStep Transformer model proposed in this study can effectively use imbalanced data to construct a model. It possesses good dynamic prediction ability for short-term and long-term survival and functional outcome of patients with ICH undergoing MIS, providing a novel tool for individualized assessment of prognosis among patients with ICH undergoing MIS.
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.