Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Prediction of patient’s neurological recovery from cervical spinal cord injury through XGBoost learning approach

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This article was retracted on 10 May 2024

This article has been updated

Abstract

Due to the diversity of patient characteristics, therapeutic approaches, and radiological findings, it can be challenging to predict outcomes based on neurological consequences accurately within cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) entities and based on machine learning (ML) technique. Accurate neurological outcomes prediction in the patients suffering with cervical spinal cord injury is challenging due to heterogeneity existing in patient characteristics and treatment strategies. Machine learning algorithms are proven technology for achieving greater prediction outcomes. Thus, the research employed machine learning model through extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) for attaining superior accuracy and reliability followed with other MI algorithms for predicting the neurological outcomes. Besides, it generated a model of a data-driven approach with extreme gradient boosting to enhance fault detection techniques (XGBoost) efficiency rate. To forecast improvements within functionalities of neurological systems, the status has been monitored through motor position (ASIA [American Spinal Injury Association] Impairment Scale [AIS] D and E) followed by the method of prediction employing XGBoost, combined with decision tree for regression logistics. Thus, with the proposed XGBoost approach, the enhanced accuracy in reaching the outcome is 81.1%, and from other models such as decision tree (80%) and logistic regression (82%), in predicting outcomes of neurological improvements within cervical SCI patients. Considering the AUC, the XGBoost and decision tree valued with 0.867 and 0.787, whereas logistic regression showed 0.877. Therefore, the application of XGBoost for accurate prediction and decision-making in the categorization of pre-treatment in patients with cervical SCI has reached better development with this study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Change history

References

  1. Michaud F (2020) Neuromusculoskeletal human multibody models for the gait of healthy and spinal-cord-injured subjects (Doctoral dissertation, Universidade da Coruña)

  2. Liu L, Yu Y, Fei Z, Li M, Wu FX, Li HD, Pan Y, Wang J (2018) An interpretable boosting model to predict side effects of analgesics for osteoarthritis. BMC Syst Biol 12:105

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: a scalable tree boosting system. arXiv (2016), 1–6. arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.02754

  4. Chakraborty D, Elzarka H (2019) Early detection of faults in HVAC systems using an XGBoost model with a dynamic threshold. Energy Build 185:326–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Alajali W, Zhou W, Wen S, Wang Y (2018) Intersection traffic prediction using decision tree models. Symmetry 10:386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA (1992) Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 45:613–619

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40:373–383

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Talbott JF, Whetstone WD, Readdy WJ, Ferguson AR, Bresnahan JC, Saigal R, Hawryluk GW, Beattie MS, Mabray MC, Pan JZ, Manley GT, Dhall SS (2015) The brain and spinal injury center score: a novel, simple, and reproducible method for assessing the severity of acute cervical spinal cord injury with axial T2-weighted MRI findings. J Neurosurg Spine 23:495–504

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bozzo A, Marcoux J, Radhakrishna M, Pelletier J, Goulet B (2011) The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of acute spinal cord injury. J Neurotrauma 28:1401–1411

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Furlan JC, Noonan V, Cadotte DW, Fehlings MG (2011) Timing of decompressive surgery of spinal cord after traumatic spinal cord injury: an evidence-based examination of pre-clinical and clinical studies. J Neurotrauma 28:1371–1399

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Jug M, Kejzar N, Vesel M, Al Mawed S, Dobravec M, Herman S, Bajrovic´, F.F. (2015) Neurological recovery after traumatic cervical spinal cord injury is superior if surgical decompression and instrumented fusion are performed within 8 hours versus 8 to 24 hours after injury: a single center experience. J Neurotrauma 32:1385–1392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Liu J-M, Long X-H, Zhou Y, Peng H-W, Liu Z-L, Huang S-H (2016) Is urgent decompression superior to delayed surgery for traumatic spinal cord injury? A meta-Anal World Neurosurg 87:124–131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Alexander MS, Anderson KD, Biering-Sorensen F, Blight AR, Brannon R, Bryce T, Creasey G, Catz A, Curt A, Donovan W (2009) Outcome measures in spinal cord injury: recent assessments and recommendations for future directions. Spinal Cord 47:582–591

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Nusinovici S, Tham YC, Yan MYC, Ting DSW, Li J, Sabanayagam C, Wong TY, Cheng C-Y (2020) Logistic regression was as good as machine learning for predicting major chronic diseases. J Clin Epidemiol 122:56–69

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yokobori S, Zhang Z, Moghieb A, Mondello S, Gajavelli S, Dietrich WD, Bramlett H, Hayes RL, Wang M, Wang KK, Bullock MR (2015) Acute diagnostic biomarkers for spinal cord injury: review of the literature and preliminary research report. World Neurosurg 83:867–878

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Noonan VK, Fingas M, Farry A, Baxter D, Singh A, Fehlings MG, Dvorak MF (2012) Incidence and prevalence of spinal cord injury in Canada: a national perspective. Neuroepidemiology 38:219–226

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hiremath SV, Hogaboom NS, Roscher MR, Worobey LA, Oyster ML, Boninger ML (2017) Longitudinal prediction of quality-of-life scores and locomotion in individuals with traumatic spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 98:2385–2392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J (2009) The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference, and prediction. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Matsuo K, Aihara H, Nakai T, Morishita A, Tohma Y, Kohmura E (2019) Machine learning to predict in-hospital morbidity and mortality after traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 37:202–210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mortazavi BJ, Downing NS, Bucholz EM, Dharmarajan K, Manhapra A, Li SX, Negahban SN, Krumholz HM (2016) Analysis of machine learning techniques for heart failure readmissions. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 9:629–640

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Taylor RA, Pare JR, Venkatesh AK, Mowafi H, Melnick ER, Fleischman W, Hall MK (2016) Prediction of in-hospital mortality in emergency department patients with sepsis: a local big data-driven, machine learning approach. Acad Emerg Med 23:269–278

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of ECE, Vardhaman College of Engineering, Hyderabad, India

    P. Kalyani

  2. Department of CSE, Prasad V Potluri Siddhartha Institute of Technology, Vijayawada, India

    Y. Manasa

  3. Department of ECE, Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Vaddeswaram, 522302, India

    Sk Hasane Ahammad & M. Suman

  4. Department of Physics, College of Education, Salahaddin University-Erbil, Erbil, Kurdistan Region, 44002, Iraq

    Twana Mohammed Kak Anwer

  5. Institute of Theoretical Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology, Ruhr University Bochum, 44801, Bochum, Germany

    Md. Amzad Hossain

  6. Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Jashore University of Science and Technology, Jashore, 7408, Bangladesh

    Md. Amzad Hossain

  7. Electronics and Electrical Communications Engineering Department, Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufia University, Menouf, 32951, Egypt

    Ahmed Nabih Zaki Rashed

  8. Department of VLSI Microelectronics, Institute of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Saveetha School of Engineering, SIMATS, Chennai, Tamilnadu, 602105, India

    Ahmed Nabih Zaki Rashed

Authors
  1. P. Kalyani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Y. Manasa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sk Hasane Ahammad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Suman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Twana Mohammed Kak Anwer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Md. Amzad Hossain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ahmed Nabih Zaki Rashed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Authors contributed equally in this work.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Md. Amzad Hossain or Ahmed Nabih Zaki Rashed.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No competing interests.

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article has been retracted. Please see the retraction notice for more detail: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-024-08294-7

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kalyani, P., Manasa, Y., Ahammad, S.H. et al. RETRACTED ARTICLE: Prediction of patient’s neurological recovery from cervical spinal cord injury through XGBoost learning approach. Eur Spine J 32, 2140–2148 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-07712-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-07712-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation