ArticleNeurocritical care2026
Prediction of Neurological Outcome and Mortality in Cardiac Arrest Patients: An Explainable Machine Learning Study Integrating HRV, EEG, and Clinical Features.
Article in Neurocritical care, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEarly and accurate prediction of neurological outcomes and mortality in comatose patients after cardiac arrest remains challenging. Multimodal data integrating heart and brain electrophysiological signals may improve prognostic accuracy, but distinct predictive patterns underlying neurological recovery versus survival are not well characterized.
methodsWe analyzed 331 patients from the International Cardiac Arrest Research (I-CARE) dataset. Synchronous electrocardiogram (ECG) and electroencephalogram (EEG) data [obtained within 72 h after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC)] and clinical variables were collected. Multimodal features were extracted from heart rate variability (time/frequency/nonlinear) and EEG (time/frequency/nonlinear/network topology), alongside heartbeat-evoked potentials (HEP). Features were temporally weighted by the time elapsed post-ROSC. Four machine learning models [logistic regression, support vector machine (SVM), random forest, and XGBoost] predicted neurological outcome [good (Cerebral Performance Category, CPC 1-2] vs. poor (CPC 3-5)] and mortality [survival (CPC 1-4) vs. death (CPC 5)]. Model development used tenfold cross-validation on the training set (80%), with hyperparameters optimized via Optuna, and performance was evaluated on a held-out test set (20%). Class imbalance was addressed via random oversampling and balanced class weights. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and the F1-score. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis interpreted the optimal model and quantified feature contributions.
resultsXGBoost achieved the highest performance (AUC 0.95 for neurological outcome, 0.89 for mortality). SHAP analysis identified ShockableRhythm as the top predictor for neurological outcome and EEG kurtosis for mortality. Neurological outcome was more associated with EEG complexity and synchrony, whereas mortality was linked to ECG nonlinear dynamics and heart-brain coupling.
conclusionsAn XGBoost model integrating multimodal heart-brain electrophysiological features enables accurate early prognosis. The results reveal task-specific predictive patterns where neurological recovery shows stronger brain-centric associations, while survival shows stronger cardiac and heart-brain interaction associations. These findings provide a new direction for the development of personalized prognostic assessment tools based on multimodal physiological data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42192049What 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.