Cited by 26Cardiac Arrest and ResuscitationMachine Learning in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Explainable machine learning model based on EEG, ECG, and clinical features for predicting neurological outcomes in cardiac arrest patient

Open access

Abstract

Early and accurate prediction of neurological outcomes in comatose patients following cardiac arrest is critical for informed clinical decision-making. Existing studies have predominantly focused on EEG for assessing brain injury, with some exploring ECG data. However, the integration of EEG, ECG, and clinical features remains insufficiently investigated, and its potential to enhance predictive accuracy has not been fully established. Moreover, the limited interpretability of current models poses significant barriers to clinical application. Using the I-CARE database, we analyzed EEG, ECG, and clinical data from comatose cardiac arrest patients. After rigorous preprocessing and feature engineering, machine learning models (Logistic Regression, SVM, Random Forest, and Gradient Boosting) were developed. Performance was evaluated through AUC-ROC, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, with SHAP applied to interpret feature contributions. Our multi-modal model outperformed single-modality models, achieving AUC values from 0.75 to 1.0. Notably, the model's accuracy peaked at a critical point within the 12-24 h window (e.g., 18 h, AUC = 1.0), surpassing EEG-only (AUC 0.7-0.8) and ECG-only (AUC < 0.6) models. SHAP identified Shockable Rhythm as the most influential feature (mean SHAP value 0.17), emphasizing its role in predictive accuracy. This study presents a novel multi-modal approach that significantly enhances early neurological outcome prediction in critical care. SHAP-based interpretability further supports clinical applicability, paving the way for more personalized patient management post-cardiac arrest.

Overview

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 · 10.1038/s41598-025-93579-0

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. Perkins, G. D. et al. Brain injury after cardiac arrest. Lancet 398 (10307), 1269–1278 (2021). · DOI
  2. Perkins, G. D. et al. European resuscitation Council guidelines 2021: executive summary [published correction appears in resuscitation. ;163:97–98. (2021). · DOI
  3. Callaway, C. W. et al. Part 8: Post-cardiac arrest care: 2015 American heart association guidelines update for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care [published correction appears in circulation. ;136(10):e197. (2017). · DOI
  4. Nolan, J. P. et al. European resuscitation Council and European society of intensive care medicine 2015 guidelines for post-resuscitation care [published correction appears in intensive. Care Med. 42 (3), 488–489 (2016). · DOI
  5. Sandroni, C., D’Arrigo, S. & Nolan, J. P. Prognostication after cardiac arrest. Crit Care. ;22(1):150. Published 2018 Jun 5. (2018). · DOI
  6. Sandroni, C., Cronberg, T. & Hofmeijer, J. EEG monitoring after cardiac arrest. Intensive Care Med. 48 (10), 1439–1442 (2022). · DOI
  7. Lee, S. et al. Quantitative EEG predicts outcomes in children after cardiac arrest. Neurology 92 (20), e2329–e2338 (2019).
  8. Ghassemi, M. M. et al. Quantitative electroencephalogram trends predict recovery in hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. Crit. Care Med. 47 (10), 1416–1423 (2019). · DOI
  9. Kim, M. J., Kim, Y. J., Yum, M. S. & Kim, W. Y. Alpha-power in electroencephalography as good outcome predictor for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors. Sci. Rep. 12 (1), 10907 (2022). Published 2022 Jun 28. · DOI
  10. Dietrichs, E. S., Tveita, T., Myles, R. & Smith, G. A novel ECG-biomarker for cardiac arrest during hypothermia. Scand. J. Trauma. Resusc. Emerg. Med. 28 (1), 27 (2020). Published 2020 Apr 10. · DOI
  11. Benghanem, S. et al. Heart rate variability for neuro-prognostication after CA: insight from the Parisian registry. Resusc. Published Online June 24, (2024). · DOI
  12. Lenstra, J. J. et al. la The association of early electrocardiographic abnormalities with brain injury severity and outcome in severe traumatic brain injury. Front Neurol. ;11:597737. Published 2021 Jan 8. (2021). · DOI
  13. Rohaut, B. et al. multi-modal assessment improves neuroprognosis performance in clinically unresponsive critical-care patients with brain injury. Nat. Med. 30 (8), 2349–2355 (2024). · DOI · Paper page
  14. Hermann, B. et al. Aberrant brain-heart coupling is associated with the severity of post cardiac arrest brain injury. Ann. Clin. Transl Neurol. 11 (4), 866–882 (2024). · DOI
  15. Delorme, A. & Makeig, S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J. Neurosci. Methods. 134 (1), 9–21 (2004). · DOI · Paper page
  16. Zheng, W. L. et al. Predicting neurological outcome from electroencephalogram dynamics in comatose patients after cardiac arrest with deep learning. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 69 (5), 1813–1825 (2022). · DOI
  17. Rangsungnoen, S., Chanbenjapipu, P., Mathuradavong, N. & Suwanprasert, K. A hybrid signal processing of RR intervals from QTc variation searching arrhythmia and improving heart rate variability assessment in acute large artery ischemic stroke. J. Med. Eng. 2016, 9823026 (2016). · DOI
  18. Ramadan, M. A. et al. multi-modal machine learning approach for emotion recognition using physiological signals. Biomed. Signal Process. Control, 96. (2024). · DOI
  19. Dai, C. et al. Combining early post-resuscitation EEG and HRV features improves the prognostic performance in cardiac arrest model of rats. Am. J. Emerg. Med. 36 (12), 2242–2248 (2018). · DOI
  20. Tian, F. et al. Surge of corticocardiac coupling in SHRSP rats exposed to forebrain cerebral ischemia. J. Neurophysiol. 121 (3), 842–852 (2019). · DOI
  21. Sung, C. W., Shieh, J. S. & Jaw, F. S. Machine learning analysis of heart rate variability for the detection of seizures in comatose cardiac arrest survivors. IEEE Access. 8, 160515–160525 (2020). · DOI
  22. Cui, X. et al. Adaptive LASSO logistic regression based on particle swarm optimization for Alzheimer’s disease early diagnosis. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 207, 106177 (2021).
  23. Jomthanachai, S., Wong, W. P. & Khaw, K. W. An Application of Machine Learning Regression To Feature Selection: a Study of Logistics Performance and Economic Attribute (Neural Computing and Applications, 2022). · DOI
  24. El Guide, M., Jbilou, K. & Koukouvinos, C. Comparative Study of L1 Regularized Logistic Regression Methods for Variable Selection (Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation, 2022). · DOI
  25. Huddar, M. G., Sannakki, S. S. & Manjunath, S. Multi-level feature optimization and multi-modal contextual fusion for sentiment analysis and emotion classification. Comput. Intell. 36 (2), 440–452 (2020). · DOI
  26. Wang, X., Xu, M., Xiong, X. & Ning, C. Remote sensing scene classification using heterogeneous feature extraction and multi-level fusion. IEEE Access. 8, 211814–211825 (2020).
  27. Elreedy, D., Atiya, A. F. & Kamalov, F. A theoretical distribution analysis of synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) for imbalanced learning. Mach. Learn., (2024). · DOI
  28. Brugnara, G., Neuberger, U., Mahmutoglu, M. A., Foltyn, M., Herweh, C., Nagel, S., Heiland, S. Multi-modal predictive modeling of endovascular treatment outcome for acute ischemic stroke using machine-learning. Stroke, 2020. · DOI
  29. Sharma, R., Pachori, R. B. & Sircar, P. Seizures classification based on higher order statistics and deep neural network. Biomed. Signal Process. Control. 59, 101921 (2020). · DOI
  30. Sharma, R. Automated human emotion recognition using hybrid approach based on sensitivity analysis on residual time-frequency plane with online learning algorithm. Biomed. Signal Process. Control. 84, 1–10 (2023).
  31. Sharma, R., Pachori, R. B. & Sircar, P. Automated emotion recognition based on higher order statistics and deep learning algorithm. Biomed. Signal Process. Control. 55, 123–135 (2020).
  32. Sharma, R. Localization of epileptic surgical area using automated hybrid approach based on higher-order statistics with sensitivity analysis and residual wavelet transform. Biomed. Signal Process. Control. 80, 22–30 (2023).
  33. Sipper, M. High per parameter: A large-scale study of hyperparameter tuning for machine learning algorithms. Algorithms 15 (9), 315 (2022). · DOI
  34. Sahlaoui, H., Nayyar, A., Agoujil, S. & Jaber, M. M. Predicting and interpreting student performance using ensemble models and Shapley additive explanations. IEEE Access. 9, 128453–128467 (2021). · DOI
  35. Maschke, C. et al. Functional outcome prediction after cardiac arrest using machine learning and network dynamics of resting-state electroencephalography. Crit. Care Med. ;51(6) (2023). · DOI
  36. Amorim, E. et al. Predicting neurological outcome from electroencephalogram dynamics in comatose patients after cardiac arrest with deep learning. Neurocrit Care. 39 (1), 137–146 (2023).
  37. Sung, C. W. et al. Machine learning analysis of heart rate variability for the detection of seizures in comatose cardiac arrest survivors. J. Clin. Monit. Comput. 34 (5), 917–926 (2020).
  38. Uslenghi, F. et al. Recovery from coma after cardiac arrest: which time-window counts the most for deep learning predictions? Resuscitation 182, 40–48 (2023).
  39. Dai, C. et al. Combining early post-resuscitation EEG and HRV features improves the prognostic performance in cardiac arrest model of rats. Am J Emerg Med. 36(10):1857.e1-1857. (2018). · DOI
  40. Callaway, C. W. et al. Part 8: Post-cardiac arrest care: 2015 American heart association guidelines update for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. Circulation ;132 (2015). (18 Suppl 2). · DOI
  41. Nolan, J. P. et al. European resuscitation Council and European society of intensive care medicine guidelines for post-resuscitation care. Intensive Care Med. 41 (12), 2039–2056 (2015). · DOI
  42. Sandroni, C. et al. Prognostication in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest: an updated European resuscitation Council and European society of intensive care medicine consensus statement. Intensive Care Med. 47 (9), 1059–1083 (2021). · DOI
  43. Jeanne, M., Logier, R., De Jonckheere, J., Tavernier, B. & Vallet, B. Heart rate variability during total intravenous anesthesia: effects of nociception and analgesia. Anesth. Analgesia. 108 (2), 691–695 (2009).
  44. Campbell, J. P. & Sleigh, J. W. The role of EEG in monitoring and management of anaesthesia and its recovery. Anesthesiology 129 (2), 398–341 (2018).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Multimodal Artificial Intelligence for Precision Critical Care: A Scoping Review

    Yang, M., Shi, N., Chen, H., Po, E. Y. P., Ng, P. Y., Lai, P. C. K., Wu, Y.-C., & Fong, D. Y. T. (2026) · Health Data Science · doi:10.34133/hds.0356 · Cited by 3

    “…to high storage requirements and their primary relevance to specific clinical tasks, such as neurological outcome prediction with EEG [ 19 , 52 , 53 , 56 , 61 ] or MRI [ 19 , 52 ], pneumonia detection via chest x-ray [ 62 , 63 ], and forecasting mechanical circulatory support needs from ECG and…”

Metadata

Authors
Niu, Y., Chen, X., Fan, J., Liu, C., Fang, M., Liu, Z., Meng, X., Liu, Y., Lu, L., & Fan, H.
Affiliations
  • Tianjin University (CN)
  • University of International Relations (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Lu, Lu
  • Fan, Haojun
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-04-03
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
11498-11498
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4409149668
Cited by
26
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 6
FWCI
27.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
the National Key R&D Program of China (No. 2021YFC3002200)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
cardiac arrest, neurological outcome prediction, comatose patients, EEG, ECG, multimodal fusion, clinical features, SHAP, shockable rhythm
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Adult, Aged, Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Coma, Electrocardiography, Electroencephalography, Female, Heart Arrest, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prognosis, ROC Curve, Area Under Curve

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