Cited by 44Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders

Multimodal Prediction of 3- and 12-Month Outcomes in ICU Patients with Acute Disorders of Consciousness

Open access
Amiri, Moshgan, Raimondo, Federico, Fisher, Patrick M., Cacic Hribljan, Melita, Sidaros, Annette, Othman, Marwan H., Zibrandtsen, Ivan, Bergdal, Ove +22 more·2024·Neurocritical Care

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: In intensive care unit (ICU) patients with coma and other disorders of consciousness (DoC), outcome prediction is key to decision-making regarding prognostication, neurorehabilitation, and management of family expectations. Current prediction algorithms are largely based on chronic DoC, whereas multimodal data from acute DoC are scarce. Therefore, the Consciousness in Neurocritical Care Cohort Study Using Electroencephalography and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (i.e. CONNECT-ME; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02644265) investigates ICU patients with acute DoC due to traumatic and nontraumatic brain injuries, using electroencephalography (EEG) (resting-state and passive paradigms), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) (resting-state) and systematic clinical examinations. Methods: We previously presented results for a subset of patients ( n = 87) concerning prediction of consciousness levels in the ICU. Now we report 3- and 12-month outcomes in an extended cohort ( n = 123). Favorable outcome was defined as a modified Rankin Scale score ≤ 3, a cerebral performance category score ≤ 2, and a Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended score ≥ 4. EEG features included visual grading, automated spectral categorization, and support vector machine consciousness classifier. fMRI features included functional connectivity measures from six resting-state networks. Random forest and support vector machine were applied to EEG and fMRI features to predict outcomes. Here, random forest results are presented as areas under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curves or accuracy. Cox proportional regression with in-hospital death as a competing risk was used to assess independent clinical predictors of time to favorable outcome. Results: Between April 2016 and July 2021, we enrolled 123 patients (mean age 51 years, 42% women). Of 82 (66%) ICU survivors, 3- and 12-month outcomes were available for 79 (96%) and 77 (94%), respectively. EEG features predicted both 3-month (AUC 0.79 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77–0.82]) and 12-month (AUC 0.74 [95% CI 0.71–0.77]) outcomes. fMRI features appeared to predict 3-month outcome (accuracy 0.69–0.78) both alone and when combined with some EEG features (accuracies 0.73–0.84) but not 12-month outcome (larger sample sizes needed). Independent clinical predictors of time to favorable outcome were younger age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.04 [95% CI 1.02–1.06]), traumatic brain injury (HR 1.94 [95% CI 1.04–3.61]), command-following abilities at admission (HR 2.70 [95% CI 1.40–5.23]), initial brain imaging without severe pathological findings (HR 2.42 [95% CI 1.12–5.22]), improving consciousness in the ICU (HR 5.76 [95% CI 2.41–15.51]), and favorable visual-graded EEG (HR 2.47 [95% CI 1.46–4.19]). Conclusions: Our results indicate that EEG and fMRI features and readily available clinical data predict short-term outcome of patients with acute DoC and that EEG also predicts 12-month outcome after ICU discharge.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12028-023-01816-z

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Prior studies have shown that multimodal models outperform single-modality models in predictive performance.

    “All of these studies have shown that multimodal models outperform single-modality models in predictive performance.”

    From Multimodal Artificial Intelligence for Precision Critical Care: A Scoping Review (2026) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Results (Combined EEG and fMRI Features and Functional Outcome; page unavailable) report that combined models predicted 3-month outcomes but not 12-month outcomes. The Discussion says EEG features predicted both outcomes, individually and in combinations. Thus this study does not show that multimodal models consistently outperform single-modality models; for 12-month prediction, its findings point the other way. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [8]Hemphill JC White DB Clinical nihilism in neuro-emergencies Emerg Med Clin North Am 2009 27 1 27 19218017 PMC2676162
  2. [12]The Vegetative and Minimally Conscious States: A Comparison: The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation [Internet]. [cited 2022 Nov 9];Available from: https://journals.lww.com/headtraumarehab/Abstract/1997/08000/The_Vegetative_and_Minimally_Conscious_States__A.5.aspx
  3. [17]Giacino JT Kalmar K Whyte J The JFK coma recovery scale-revised: measurement characteristics and diagnostic utility Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004 85 12 2020 2029 15605342
  4. [30]Giacino JT Ashwal S Childs N The minimally conscious state Neurology 2002 58 3 349 353 11839831
  5. [43]Pedregosa FABIANPEDREGOSA F, Michel V, Grisel OLIVIERGRISEL O, et al. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python Gaël Varoquaux Bertrand Thirion Vincent Dubourg Alexandre Passos Pedregosa, Varoquaux, Gramfort et al. Matthieu Perrot. J Mach Learn Res 2011;12:2825–30.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amiri, M., Raimondo, F., Fisher, P. M., Cacic Hribljan, M., Sidaros, A., Othman, M. H., Zibrandtsen, I., Bergdal, O., Fabritius, M. L., Hansen, A. E., Hassager, C., Højgaard, J. L. S., Jensen, H. R., Knudsen, N. V., Laursen, E. L., Møller, J. E., Nersesjan, V., Nicolic, M., Sigurdsson, S. T., Sitt, J. D., Sølling, C., Welling, K. L., Willumsen, L. M., Hauerberg, J., Larsen, V. A., Fabricius, M. E., Knudsen, G. M., Kjærgaard, J., Møller, K., & Kondziella, D.
Affiliations
  • Copenhagen University Hospital (DK)
  • Forschungszentrum Jülich (DE)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Kondziella, Daniel
Venue
Neurocritical Care
Published
2023-09-11
Volume
40
Issue
2
Pages
718-733
ISSN
  • 1541-6933 (ISSN-L)
  • 1556-0961
OpenAlex
W4386609327
Cited by
44
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 11
FWCI
8.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neurocritical Care (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PUBLISSO (German National Library of Medicine) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Offerfonden
  • Lundbeckfonden
  • Rigshospitalets Forskningspuljer
  • Region Hovedstadens Forskningsfond
  • Royal Library, Copenhagen University Library
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Keywords
disorders of consciousness, coma, outcome prediction, intensive care unit, EEG, functional MRI, resting-state functional connectivity, brain injury, traumatic brain injury, non-traumatic brain injury, multimodal prediction, random forest, support vector machine, modified Rankin Scale, Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended, cerebral performance category, in-hospital mortality
MeSH terms
Clinical Studies as Topic, Brain Injuries, Consciousness, Consciousness Disorders, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Male, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Cohort Studies, Hospital Mortality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review