Machine learning-based prediction of post-stroke cognitive status using electroencephalography-derived brain network attributes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives More than half of patients with acute ischemic stroke develop post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI), a significant barrier to future neurological recovery. Thus, predicting cognitive trajectories post-AIS is crucial. Our primary objective is to determine whether brain network properties from electroencephalography (EEG) can predict post-stroke cognitive function using machine learning approach. Methods We enrolled consecutive stroke patients who underwent both EEG during the acute stroke phase and cognitive assessments 3 months post-stroke. We preprocessed acute stroke EEG data to eliminate low-quality epochs, then performed independent component analysis and quantified network characteristics using iSyncBrain®. Cognitive function was evaluated using the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA). We initially categorized participants based on the lateralization of their lesions and then developed machine learning models to predict cognitive status in the left and right hemisphere lesion groups. Results Eighty-seven patients were included, and the accuracy of lesion laterality prediction using EEG attributes was 97.0%. In the left hemispheric lesion group, the network attributes of the theta band were significantly correlated with MoCA scores, and higher global efficiency, clustering coefficient, and lower characteristic path length were associated with higher MoCA scores. Most features related to cognitive scores were selected from the frontal lobe. The predictive powers (R-squared) were 0.76 and 0.65 for the left and right stroke groups, respectively. Conclusion Estimating EEG-based network properties in the acute phase of ischemic stroke through a machine learning model has a potential to predict cognitive outcomes after ischemic stroke.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".