Data-driven biomarkers outperform theory-based biomarkers in predicting stroke motor outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Chronic motor impairments are a leading cause of disability after stroke. Previous studies have predicted motor outcomes based on the degree of damage to predefined structures in the motor system, such as the corticospinal tract. However, such theory-based approaches may not take full advantage of the information contained in clinical imaging data. The present study uses data-driven approaches to predict chronic motor outcomes after stroke and compares the accuracy of these predictions to previously-identified theory-based biomarkers. Using a cross-validation framework, regression models were trained using lesion masks and motor outcomes data from 789 stroke patients (293 female/496 male) from the ENIGMA Stroke Recovery Working Group (age 64.9±18.0 years; time since stroke 12.2±0.2 months; normalised motor score 0.7±0.5 (range [0,1]). The out-of-sample prediction accuracy of two theory-based biomarkers was assessed: lesion load of the corticospinal tract, and lesion load of multiple descending motor tracts. These theory-based prediction accuracies were compared to the prediction accuracy from three data-driven biomarkers: lesion load of lesion-behaviour maps, lesion load of structural networks associated with lesion-behaviour maps, and measures of regional structural disconnection. In general, data-driven biomarkers had better prediction accuracy - as measured by higher explained variance in chronic motor outcomes - than theory-based biomarkers. Data-driven models of regional structural disconnection performed the best of all models tested (R 2 = 0.210, p < 0.001), performing significantly better than predictions using the theory-based biomarkers of lesion load of the corticospinal tract (R 2 = 0.132, p< 0.001) and of multiple descending motor tracts (R 2 = 0.180, p < 0.001). They also performed slightly, but significantly, better than other data-driven biomarkers including lesion load of lesion-behaviour maps (R 2 =0.200, p < 0.001) and lesion load of structural networks associated with lesion-behaviour maps (R 2 =0.167, p < 0.001). Ensemble models - combining basic demographic variables like age, sex, and time since stroke - improved prediction accuracy for theory-based and data-driven biomarkers. Finally, combining both theory-based and data-driven biomarkers with demographic variables improved predictions, and the best ensemble model achieved R 2 = 0.241, p < 0.001. Overall, these results demonstrate that models that predict chronic motor outcomes using data-driven features, particularly when lesion data is represented in terms of structural disconnection, perform better than models that predict chronic motor outcomes using theory-based features from the motor system. However, combining both theory-based and data-driven models provides the best predictions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".