Systematic Review of Machine Learning Applied to the Secondary Prevention of Ischemic Stroke.

Ischemic stroke is a serious disease posing significant threats to human health and life, with the highest absolute and relative risks of a poor prognosis following the first occurrence, and more than 90% of strokes are attributable to modifiable risk factors. Currently, machine learning (ML) is wid...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Medical Systems Vol. 48; no. 1; pp. 1 - 21
Main Authors: Chen, Meng, Qian, Dongbao, Wang, Yixuan, An, Junyan, Meng, Ke, Xu, Shuai, Liu, Sheng, Sun, Meiyan, Li, Miao, Pang, Chunying
Format: research systematic review tables/charts Journal Article
Published: Springer Nature 1/2/2024
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
Description
Summary:Ischemic stroke is a serious disease posing significant threats to human health and life, with the highest absolute and relative risks of a poor prognosis following the first occurrence, and more than 90% of strokes are attributable to modifiable risk factors. Currently, machine learning (ML) is widely used for the prediction of ischemic stroke outcomes. By identifying risk factors, predicting the risk of poor prognosis and thus developing personalized treatment plans, it effectively reduces the probability of poor prognosis, leading to more effective secondary prevention. This review includes 41 studies since 2018 that used ML algorithms to build prognostic prediction models for ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), and acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We analyzed in detail the risk factors used in these studies, the sources and processing methods of the required data, the model building and validation, and their application in different prediction time windows. The results indicate that among the included studies, the top five risk factors in terms of frequency were cardiovascular diseases, age, sex, national institutes of health stroke scale (NIHSS) score, and diabetes. Furthermore, 64% of the studies used single-center data, 65% of studies using imbalanced data did not perform data balancing, 88% of the studies did not utilize external validation datasets for model validation, and 72% of the studies did not provide explanations for their models. Addressing these issues is crucial for enhancing the credibility and effectiveness of the research, consequently improving the development and implementation of secondary prevention measures.