Machine learning predicts clinically significant health related quality of life improvement after sensorimotor rehabilitation interventions in chronic stroke | Scientific Reports – Nature.com
Lin, X.-J., Lin, I. M. & Fan, S.-Y. Methodological issues in measuring health-related quality of life. Tzu Chi Med. J. 25, 8–12 (2013).
Guyatt, G. H. et al. Exploration of the value of health-related quality-of-life information from clinical research and into clinical practice. Mayo Clin. Proc. 82, 1229–1239 (2007).
Virani, S. S. et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics 2021 update. Circulation 143, e254–e743 (2021).
Carod-Artal, F. J. & Egido, J. A. Quality of life after stroke: The importance of a good recovery. Cerebrovasc. Dis. 27, 204–214 (2009).
Nichols-Larsen, D. S., Clark, P. C., Zeringue, A., Greenspan, A. & Blanton, S. Factors influencing stroke survivors’ quality of life during subacute recovery. Stroke 36, 1480–1484 (2005).
Bzdok, D. & Ioannidis, J. P. A. Exploration, inference, and prediction in neuroscience and biomedicine. Trends Neurosci. 42, 251–262 (2019).
Guyon, I. & Elisseeff, A. An introduction to variable and feature selection. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 3, 1157–1182 (2003).
Heo, J. et al. Machine learning-based model for prediction of outcomes in acute stroke. Stroke 50, 1263–1265 (2019).
Lin, W. Y. et al. Predicting post-stroke activities of daily living through a machine learning-based approach on initiating rehabilitation. Int. J. Med. Inform. 111, 159–164 (2018).
Sale, P. et al. Predicting motor and cognitive improvement through machine learning algorithm in human subject that underwent a rehabilitation treatment in the early stage of stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 27, 2962–2972 (2018).
Wang, H. L. et al. Automatic machine-learning-based outcome prediction in patients with primary intracerebral hemorrhage. Front. Neurol. 10, 910 (2019).
Thakkar, H. K., Liao, W. W., Wu, C. Y., Hsieh, Y. W. & Lee, T. H. Predicting clinically significant motor function improvement after contemporary task-oriented interventions using machine learning approaches. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 17, 131 (2020).
Tokmakçı, M., Ünalan, D., Soyuer, F. & Öztürk, A. The reevaluate statistical results of quality of life in patients with cerebrovascular disease using adaptive network-based fuzzy inference system. Expert Syst. Appl. 34, 958–963 (2008).
Morris, J. H., van Wijck, F., Joice, S. & Donaghy, M. Predicting health related quality of life 6 months after stroke: The role of anxiety and upper limb dysfunction. Disabil. Rehabil. 35, 291–299 (2013).
Sokolova, M. & Lapalme, G. A systematic analysis of performance measures for classification tasks. Inf Process Manag. 45, 427–437 (2009).
Turner, D. L., Ramos-Murguialday, A., Birbaumer, N., Hoffmann, U. & Luft, A. Neurophysiology of robot-mediated training and therapy: A perspective for future use in clinical populations. Front. Neurol. 4, 184 (2013).
Deconinck, F. J. et al. Reflections on mirror therapy: A systematic review of the effect of mirror visual feedback on the brain. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 29, 349–361 (2015).
Schlaug, G., Renga, V. & Nair, D. Transcranial direct current stimulation in stroke recovery. Arch. Neurol. 65, 1571–1576 (2008).
Kutner, N. G., Zhang, R., Butler, A. J., Wolf, S. L. & Alberts, J. L. Quality-of-life change associated with robotic-assisted therapy to improve hand motor function in patients with subacute stroke: A randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther. 90, 493–504 (2010).
Mehrholz, J. Is electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training effective for improving arm function in people who have had a stroke?: A cochrane review summary with commentary. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 98, 339–340 (2019).
Thieme, H. et al. Mirror therapy for improving motor function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 7, Cd008449 (2018).
Bornheim, S. et al. Evaluating the effects of tDCS in stroke patients using functional outcomes: A systematic review. Disabil. Rehabil. 44, 13–23 (2022).
Kang, N., Summers, J. J. & Cauraugh, J. H. Transcranial direct current stimulation facilitates motor learning post-stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 87, 345 (2016).
Liao, W. W. et al. Timing-dependent effects of transcranial direct current stimulation with mirror therapy on daily function and motor control in chronic stroke: A randomized controlled pilot study. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 17, 101 (2020).
An, T. G., Kim, S. H. & Kim, K. U. Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation of stroke patients on depression and quality of life. J. Phys. Ther. Sci. 29, 505–507 (2017).
Wu, C. Y., Huang, P. C., Chen, Y. T., Lin, K. C. & Yang, H. W. Effects of mirror therapy on motor and sensory recovery in chronic stroke: A randomized controlled trial. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 94, 1023–1030 (2013).
Hsieh, Y. W. et al. Effects of home-based versus clinic-based rehabilitation combining mirror therapy and task-specific training for patients with stroke: A randomized crossover trial. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 99, 2399–2407 (2018).
Hsieh, Y. W. et al. Comparison of proximal versus distal upper-limb robotic rehabilitation on motor performance after stroke: A cluster controlled trial. Sci. Rep. 8, 2091 (2018).
Woodbury, M. L., Velozo, C. A., Richards, L. G. & Duncan, P. W. Rasch analysis staging methodology to classify upper extremity movement impairment after stroke. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 94, 1527–1533 (2013).
Gregson, J. M. et al. Reliability of the Tone Assessment Scale and the modified Ashworth scale as clinical tools for assessing poststroke spasticity. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 80, 1013–1016 (1999).
Rossi, S. et al. Safety and recommendations for TMS use in healthy subjects and patient populations, with updates on training, ethical and regulatory issues: Expert guidelines. Clin. Neurophysiol. 132, 269–306 (2021).
Duncan, P. W., Bode, R. K., Min Lai, S. & Perera, S. Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: The Stroke Impact Scale. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 84, 950–963 (2003).
Carod-Artal, F. J., Coral, L. F., Trizotto, D. S. & Moreira, C. M. The Stroke Impact Scale 3.0. Stroke 39, 2477–2484 (2008).
Lin, K. C. et al. Psychometric comparisons of the Stroke Impact Scale 3.0 and stroke-specific quality of life scale. Qual. Life Res. 19, 435–443 (2010).
Richardson, M., Campbell, N., Allen, L., Meyer, M. & Teasell, R. The stroke impact scale: Performance as a quality of life measure in a community-based stroke rehabilitation setting. Disabil. Rehabil. 38, 1425–1430 (2016).
Duncan, P. W. et al. The stroke impact scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke 30, 2131–2140 (1999).
Lang, C. E., Edwards, D. F., Birkenmeier, R. L. & Dromerick, A. W. Estimating minimal clinically important differences of upper-extremity measures early after stroke. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 89, 1693–1700 (2008).
van der Lee, J. H. et al. Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients: Results from a single-blind randomized clinical trial. Stroke 30, 2369–2375 (1999).
Hägg, O., Fritzell, P. & Nordwall, A. The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur. Spine J. 12, 12–20 (2003).
Wu, C. Y., Chuang, L. L., Lin, K. C., Lee, S. D. & Hong, W. H. Responsiveness, minimal detectable change, and minimal clinically important difference of the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living Scale in patients with improved performance after stroke rehabilitation. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 92, 1281–1287 (2011).
Lemmens, R. J., Timmermans, A. A., Janssen-Potten, Y. J., Smeets, R. J. & Seelen, H. A. Valid and reliable instruments for arm-hand assessment at ICF activity level in persons with hemiplegia: A systematic review. BMC Neurol. 12, 21 (2012).
Chen, C. M. et al. Potential predictors for health-related quality of life in stroke patients undergoing inpatient rehabilitation. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 13, 118 (2015).
Coupar, F., Pollock, A., Rowe, P., Weir, C. & Langhorne, P. Predictors of upper limb recovery after stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Rehabil. 26, 291–313 (2012).
Chiti, G. & Pantoni, L. Use of Montreal Cognitive Assessment in patients with stroke. Stroke 45, 3135–3140 (2014).
Fugl-Meyer, A. R., Jaasko, L., Leyman, I., Olsson, S. & Steglind, S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand. J. Rehabil. Med. 7, 13–31 (1975).
Wolf, S. L. et al. Assessing Wolf motor function test as outcome measure for research in patients after stroke. Stroke 32, 1635–1639 (2001).
Gregson, J. M. et al. Reliability of measurements of muscle tone and muscle power in stroke patients. Age Ageing 29, 223–228 (2000).
van der Lee, J. H., Beckerman, H., Knol, D. L., de Vet, H. C. & Bouter, L. M. Clinimetric properties of the motor activity log for the assessment of arm use in hemiparetic patients. Stroke 35, 1410–1414 (2004).
Desrosiers, J., Bravo, G., Hébert, R., Dutil, É. & Mercier, L. Validation of the Box and Block Test as a measure of dexterity of elderly people: Reliability, validity, and norms studies. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 75, 751–755 (1994).
Wu, C. Y., Chuang, I. C., Ma, H. I., Lin, K. C. & Chen, C. L. Validity and responsiveness of the Revised Nottingham Sensation Assessment for outcome evaluation in stroke rehabilitation. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 70, 1–8 (2016).
Linacre, J. M., Heinemann, A. W., Wright, B. D., Granger, C. V. & Hamilton, B. B. The structure and stability of the functional independence measure. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 75, 127–132 (1994).
Sarker, S. J., Rudd, A. G., Douiri, A. & Wolfe, C. D. Comparison of 2 extended activities of daily living scales with the Barthel Index and predictors of their outcomes: Cohort study within the South London Stroke Register (SLSR). Stroke 43, 1362–1369 (2012).
Tin, K. H. The random subspace method for constructing decision forests. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 20, 832–844 (1998).
Cover, T. & Hart, P. Nearest neighbor pattern classification. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 13, 21–27 (1967).
Zhu, M., Chen, W., Hirdes, J. P. & Stolee, P. The K-nearest neighbor algorithm predicted rehabilitation potential better than current clinical assessment protocol. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 60, 1015–1021 (2007).
Manning, T., Sleator, R. D. & Walsh, P. Biologically inspired intelligent decision making. Bioengineered 5, 80–95 (2014).
Abedi, V. et al. Novel screening tool for stroke using artificial neural network. Stroke 48, 1678–1681 (2017).
Smola, A. J. & Schölkopf, B. A tutorial on support vector regression. Stat. Comput. 14, 199–222 (2004).
Kim, J. K., Choo, Y. J. & Chang, M. C. Prediction of motor function in stroke patients using machine learning algorithm: Development of practical models. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 30, 105856 (2021).
Jiawei, H. M. K. & Jian, P. Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques 2nd edn. (Morgan Kaufmann, 2006).
Shouman, M., Turner, T. & Stocker, R. Using decision tree for diagnosing heart disease patients. In Proceedings of the Ninth Australasian Data Mining Conference, vol. 121, 23–30 (Australian Computer Society, Inc., 2011).
Kent, J. T. Information gain and a general measure of correlation. Biometrika 70, 163–173 (1983).
Wang, W. et al. A systematic review of machine learning models for predicting outcomes of stroke with structured data. PLoS ONE 15, e0234722 (2020).
Luo, W. et al. Guidelines for developing and reporting machine learning predictive models in biomedical research: A multidisciplinary view. J. Med. Internet Res. 18, e323 (2016).
Rodriguez, J. D., Perez, A. & Lozano, J. A. Sensitivity analysis of k-fold cross validation in prediction error estimation. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 32, 569–575 (2010).
Breiman, L. Random forests. Mach. Learn. 45, 5–32 (2001).
Hall, M. et al. The WEKA data mining software: An update. SIGKDD Explor. Newsl. 11, 10–18 (2009).
Pandey, A. K., Rajpoot, D. S. & Rajpoot, D. S. A comparative study of classification techniques by utilizing WEKA. In 2016 International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication (ICSC) (2016).
Frank, E., Hall, M., Trigg, L., Holmes, G. & Witten, I. H. Data mining in bioinformatics using Weka. Bioinformatics 20, 2479–2481 (2004).
Sim, J. A. et al. The major effects of health-related quality of life on 5-year survival prediction among lung cancer survivors: Applications of machine learning. Sci. Rep. 10, 10693 (2020).
Scrutinio, D. et al. Machine learning to predict mortality after rehabilitation among patients with severe stroke. Sci. Rep. 10, 20127 (2020).
Apao, N. J., Feliscuzo, L. S., Romana, C. L. S. & Tagaro, J. Multiclass classification using random forest algorithm to prognosticate the level of activity of patients with stroke. IJSTR 9, 1233–1240 (2020).
Badriyah, T., Sakinah, N., Syarif, I. & Syarif, D. R. Machine learning algorithm for stroke disease classification. In 2020 International Conference on Electrical, Communication, and Computer Engineering (ICECCE) (2020).
White, J. et al. Predictors of health-related quality of life in community-dwelling stroke survivors: A cohort study. Fam. Pract. 33, 382–387 (2016).
Katona, M., Schmidt, R., Schupp, W. & Graessel, E. Predictors of health-related quality of life in stroke patients after neurological inpatient rehabilitation: A prospective study. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 13, 58 (2015).
Huang, P. C. et al. Predictors of motor, daily function, and quality-of-life improvements after upper-extremity robot-assisted rehabilitation in stroke. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 68, 325–333 (2014).
Nijenhuis, S. M. et al. Strong relations of elbow excursion and grip strength with post-stroke arm function and activities: Should we aim for this in technology-supported training?. J. Rehabil. Assist. Technol. Eng. 5, 2055668318779301 (2018).
Clarke, P. & Black, S. E. Quality of life following stroke: Negotiating disability, identity, and resources. J. Appl. Gerontol. 24, 319–336 (2005).
Pedersen, S. G. et al. Stroke-specific quality of life one-year post-stroke in two Scandinavian country-regions with different organisation of rehabilitation services: A prospective study. Disabil. Rehabil. 43, 3810–3820 (2021).
Doyle, S., Bennett, S., Fasoli, S. E. & McKenna, K. T. Interventions for sensory impairment in the upper limb after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 6, CD006331 (2010).
Wu, C. W., Seo, H. J. & Cohen, L. G. Influence of electric somatosensory stimulation on paretic-hand function in chronic stroke. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 87, 351–357 (2006).
Turville, M., Carey, L. M., Matyas, T. A. & Blennerhassett, J. Change in functional arm use is associated with somatosensory skills after sensory retraining poststroke. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 71, 1–9 (2017).
Meyer, S., Karttunen, A. H., Thijs, V., Feys, H. & Verheyden, G. How do somatosensory deficits in the arm and hand relate to upper limb impairment, activity, and participation problems after stroke? A systematic review. Phys. Ther. 94, 1220–1231 (2014).
Rokach, L. Ensemble methods for classifiers. In Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery Handbook (eds Maimon, O. & Rokach, L.) 957–980 (Springer, 2005).
Hung, C. Y., Chen, W. C., Lai, P. T., Lin, C. H. & Lee, C. C. Comparing deep neural network and other machine learning algorithms for stroke prediction in a large-scale population-based electronic medical claims database. Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2017, 3110–3113 (2017).