ArticleActa neurologica Belgica2026
Functional outcome prediction after traumatic cervical spinal cord injury using ensemble machine learning: a three‑center validation study.
Article in Acta neurologica Belgica, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTraumatic cervical spinal cord injury (TCSCI) often causes severe neurological dysfunction. Accurate prediction of functional recovery is essential for clinical decision‑making and rehabilitation planning.
objectiveTo develop an ensemble learning model integrating baseline clinical data, neurological assessments, and cervical MRI features to predict neurological recovery and functional outcomes at one year post‑injury in TCSCI patients.
methodsWe retrospectively collected data from 410 TCSCI patients across three medical institutions (2017-2025). A prediction model was constructed using a two‑layer Stacking ensemble strategy. Baseline characteristics included demographic, clinical, and radiologic features. Primary outcome was one‑year ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) grade; secondary outcomes were Upper Extremity Motor Score (UEMS), Lower Extremity Motor Score (LEMS), Total Motor Score (TMS), and Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (SCIM III). SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis was performed to evaluate model interpretability and quantify the contribution of each predictor to the model output. Performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC), R², mean absolute error (MAE), and root mean square error (RMSE).
resultsOf 340 patients analyzed (mean age 54.1 ± 14.9 years; 229 males), 242 formed the training set and 98 the external test set. The model achieved AUC ≥ 0.85 for all AIS grades. For continuous outcomes, R² values for UEMS, LEMS, TMS, and SCIM III were 0.9867, 0.9880, 0.9872, and 0.9863, respectively, with corresponding MAEs of 2.0667, 7.2751, 7.9496, 3.5956. SHAP analysis identified baseline UEMS and AIS grade as the most influential predictors, followed by maximum spinal cord compression (MSCC).
conclusionThis externally validated model accurately predicts 1‑year functional recovery in TCSCI patients and may support early prognosis assessment and individualized rehabilitation planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42545621What 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.