ReviewFrontiers in neurology
Machine learning models in post-stroke aphasia: a scoping review.
Review in Frontiers in neurology. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically review the literature on the application of machine learning models in post-stroke aphasia, and to provide a reference for the construction and clinical application of related models. Methods: Based on scoping review methodology, we searched Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, CNKI, VIP database, Wanfang database, and China Biology Medicine. The search time limit was from the database's establishment to November 20, 2025, and the retrieved literature was screened, summarized, extracted, and analyzed. Results: A total of 19 articles were included. The analysis results showed that the machine learning algorithms used in post-stroke aphasia models were mainly supervised methods, including random forests, neural networks, and support vector machines. The data sources of the model were diverse. The indicators included in the model covered multimodal data. The functions of the model include diagnosis and classification of aphasia patients, assessment and prediction of the severity of aphasia patients, prediction of the language function and rehabilitation outcome of patients, monitoring and evaluation of symptoms, etc. Conclusion: Machine learning models have high applicability and broad scope in post-stroke aphasia. Future research still requires multi-center, multi-modal data and external validation to enhance its robustness and clinical feasibility.
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.