Evidence mapPaperPMID 41766999Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2026

Interpretable machine learning for predicting 30-day mortality following intracranial hemorrhage surgery.

Ziyang Wang, Wenbin Chen, Yan Shi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ziyang WangAnesthesiology, Ningde Municipal Hospital of Ningde Normal University, Ningde, China.
Wenbin ChenAnesthesiology, Ningde Municipal Hospital of Ningde Normal University, Ningde, China.
Yan ShiAnesthesiology, Ningde Municipal Hospital of Ningde Normal University, Ningde, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to utilize interpretable machine learning models based on perioperative data to forecast the 30-day mortality risk following intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) surgery. By employing SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to interpret the Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) model, we sought to identify modifiable prognostic factors to improve clinical decision-making. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on perioperative data from 1,271 ICH patients. After applying exclusion criteria, 992 patients were included. The dataset was randomly partitioned into training and validation cohorts (7:3 ratio). Multiple machine learning algorithms, including logistic regression, SVM, Random Forest, and XGBoost were developed. Model performance was rigorously assessed via ROC curves, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA), with hyperparameters optimized using 5-fold cross-validation. Results: The observed 30-day postoperative mortality rate was 13%. The XGBoost model achieved an AUC of 0.931 (95% CI 0.91-0.96) in the training cohort and 0.937 (95% CI 0.90-0.97) in the validation cohort, outperforming the logistic regression model (AUC 0.669). Decision curve analysis indicated that the XGBoost model provided the greatest net benefit within a threshold probability range of 5.79 to 33.52%. SHAP analysis identified postoperative pH, lactate, APTT, and CRP as the primary predictive factors. Conclusion: This study establishes an interpretable XGBoost model that leverages perioperative data to accurately predict short-term mortality after ICH surgery. By highlighting the prognostic value of these modifiable biomarkers, the model serves as a practical tool for early risk stratification, assisting in the optimization of perioperative management in critical care settings.

Indexed as

intracranial hemorrhagelactatemortalitypredictionXGBoost

Identifiers

PMID41766999
PMCPMC12945796

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.