Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Not Yet Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07544927

Clinical Validation of an Artificial Intelligence-Based Scoring System for the Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) in Patients With Stroke

This study aims to validate the clinical performance of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based automatic scoring system for the Modified Rankin Scale (mRS). The core comparison is the consistency and accuracy between the AI-generated scores and standardized manual mRS follow-up assessments performed by trained professionals. The goal is to provide a convenient, efficient, and objective tool for stroke prognosis assessment, reduce the subjective variability of manual scoring, and optimize the stroke follow-up workflow.

Not Yet Recruiting

Trial opening soon.

Get Notified

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

About this study

This is a prospective, multicenter, observational study designed to validate the diagnostic performance of an AI-based automated scoring system for the Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) in patients with stroke. The primary objective is to evaluate the agreement between AI-generated mRS scores and standardized manual assessments conducted by trained clinicians. Secondary endpoints include the system's sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) in classifying functional outcomes.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age ≥ 18 years, male or female.
  • Clinically diagnosed with stroke, and confirmed by cranial CT/MRI to have stroke.
  • Clinically stable, with basic communication ability at discharge or outpatient visit. The patient or a fixed family caregiver is able to cooperate with telephone follow-up at 1 week after discharge or outpatient visit.
  • Signed informed consent by the patient or their legally authorized representative.

Exclusion criteria

  • Neurological deficits caused by non-stroke etiologies (e.g., brain tumor, traumatic brain injury, encephalitis).
  • Presence of severe disturbance of consciousness, severe cognitive impairment, psychiatric disorders, or global aphasia at discharge/outpatient visit, preventing effective communication; neither the patient nor family can cooperate with follow-up or assessment.
  • Combined with severe multi-organ failure (e.g., cardiac, hepatic, renal, respiratory), with an expected survival of less than 1 month, making completion of the 1-week follow-up impossible.
  • Long-term bedridden without a fixed caregiver, with no confirmed contact for follow-up, or refusal to participate in telephone follow-up and mRS assessment.
  • Incomplete clinical data, preventing baseline data collection.

Treatment and study plan

Primary outcomes

  1. Agreement Between Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Based and Manual Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) Assessments

    Time frame: 7 days post-discharge or post-outpatient visit, ± 2 days

    The weighted kappa coefficient quantifies the level of agreement between the Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores and the standardized manual mRS assessments performed by trained clinicians

Secondary outcomes

  1. Agreement Between AI-based and Manual Assessments of Dichotomized Modified Rankin Scale (mRS)

    Time frame: 7 days post-discharge or post-outpatient visit, ± 2 days

    The simple kappa coefficient quantifies the level of agreement between the Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated dichotomized Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores (0-2 vs. 3-6) and the standardized manual mRS assessments performed by trained clinicians

  2. Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement Between AI and Manual Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) Scores

    Time frame: 7 days post-discharge or post-outpatient visit, ± 2 days

    The Bland-Altman limits of agreement analysis evaluates the consistency between the Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated and manually assessed Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores. The difference between manual and AI scores will be plotted on the y-axis against their mean on the x-axis, with limits of agreement (mean difference ± 1.96 × standard deviation) calculated. The analysis aims to visually assess how agreement varies across the range of mRS scores and identify any proportional bias, such as greater disagreement in patients with severe disability.

  3. Diagnostic Performance of AI-Based vs. Manual Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) Dichotomization

    Time frame: 7 days post-discharge or post-outpatient visit, ± 2 days

    The diagnostic performance analysis evaluates the ability of the Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scoring system to classify functional outcomes, using manual assessment as the reference standard. A 2×2 contingency table will be constructed for the dichotomized mRS categories (good outcome: 0-2 vs. poor outcome: 3-6). The analysis will calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, and Youden's index. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve will be plotted, and the area under the curve (AUC) will be computed.

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Qingfeng Ma, MD

CONTACT

[email protected]

+8613601069493

Zixin Wang, MD Candidate

CONTACT

[email protected]

+8615031041048

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Xuanwu Hospital, Beijing

Other

Collaborators

  • Beijing Tiantan Hospital
  • Capital Medical University
  • People's Hospital of Beijing Daxing District
  • The First Hospital of Fangshan District,Beijing

Registry information

Important dates

Study start
2026
Primary completion
2028
Study completion
2028
First posted
Apr 22, 2026
Registry last updated
Apr 22, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.