AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (1.5 MB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Original Article | Open Access

Artificial Intelligence‐Based Differentiation of Ischemic and Hemorrhagic Stroke: A Retrospective, Analytical and Observational Case‐Control Design

Yvanne Joshua C. Rabe1,2( ), Monique Therese B. Punsalan1,2, Lindt Camille O. Alba1,2, Charles Matthew B. Talaue1,2
University of the East Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Medical Center, Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines
Cardinal Santos Medical Center, San Juan City, Metro Manila, Philippines
Show Author Information

Abstract

Background: Rapid differentiation between ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke is essential because management differs significantly. In settings without immediate neuroimaging, artificial intelligence (AI) may assist early decision‐making. To evaluate the performance of AI in distinguishing ischemic from hemorrhagic stroke using history and physical examination alone. Methods: This retrospective, observational, case‐control study included 54 adults (27 ischemic, 27 hemorrhagic) with neuroimaging‐confirmed stroke in a tertiary hospital from January to June 2025. De‐identified clinical data were entered into a structured AI prompt. AI predictions were compared with imaging diagnoses, and accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated. Results: Ischemic stroke patients were slightly older than hemorrhagic cases; hypertension was the most frequent comorbidity. One‐sided weakness was the most common presenting symptom, while headache occurred only in hemorrhagic stroke. Overall accuracy of Google Gemini 2.5 Pro was 66.7% (p = 0.0099). Sensitivity for ischemic stroke was 85.2%, specificity for hemorrhagic stroke was 48.1%, and PPV and NPV were 62.2% and 76.5%, respectively. Conclusion: AI demonstrated moderate diagnostic performance, with greater accuracy for ischemic than hemorrhagic stroke. AI may serve as an adjunct in resource‐limited settings but should not replace neuroimaging. Larger studies and model refinement are recommended.

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Brain Science Advances
Article number: 905023

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
Rabe YJC, Punsalan MTB, Alba LCO, et al. Artificial Intelligence‐Based Differentiation of Ischemic and Hemorrhagic Stroke: A Retrospective, Analytical and Observational Case‐Control Design. Brain Science Advances, 2026, 12(3): 905023. https://doi.org/10.26599/BSA.2026.905023

12

Views

0

Downloads

0

Crossref

Received: 10 January 2026
Revised: 03 July 2026
Accepted: 14 August 2026
Published: 15 October 2026
© The authors 2026.

This article is published with open access at journals.sagepub.com/home/BSA Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY‐NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non‐commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).