Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28542318›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Predicting congenital heart defects: A comparison of three data mining methods.

Yanhong Luo, Zhi Li, Husheng Guo, Hongyan Cao, Chunying Song, Xingping Guo, Yanbo Zhang

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Yanhong LuoDepartment of Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, People's Republic of China.
Zhi LiDepartment of Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, People's Republic of China.
Husheng GuoSchool of Computer and Information Technology, Shanxi University, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, People's Republic of China.
Hongyan CaoDepartment of Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, People's Republic of China.
Chunying SongPopulation and Family planning Commission of Shanxi province, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, People's Republic of China.
Xingping GuoPopulation and Family planning Commission of Shanxi province, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, People's Republic of China.
Yanbo ZhangDepartment of Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Congenital heart defects (CHD) is one of the most common birth defects in China. Many studies have examined risk factors for CHD, but their predictive abilities have not been evaluated. In particular, few studies have attempted to predict risks of CHD from, necessarily unbalanced, population-based cross-sectional data. Therefore, we developed and validated machine learning models for predicting, before and during pregnancy, women's risks of bearing children with CHD. We compared the results of these models in a large-scale, comprehensive population-based retrospective cross-sectional epidemiological survey of birth defects in six counties in Shanxi Province, China, covering 2006 to 2008. This contained 78 cases of CHD among 33831 live births. We constructed nine synthetic variables to use in the models: maternal age, annual per capita income, family history, maternal history of illness, nutrition and folic acid deficiency, maternal illness in pregnancy, medication use in pregnancy, environmental risk factors in pregnancy, and unhealthy maternal lifestyle in pregnancy. The machine learning algorithms Weighted Support Vector Machine (WSVM) and Weighted Random Forest (WRF) were trained on, and a logistic regression (Logit) was fitted to, two-thirds of the data. Their predictive abilities were then tested in the remaining data. True positive rate (TPR), true negative rate (TNR), accuracy (ACC), area under the curves (AUC), G-means, and Weighted accuracy (WTacc) were used to compare the classification performance of the models. Median values, from repeating the data partitioning 1000 times, were used in all comparisons. The TPR and TNR of the three classifiers were above 0.65 and 0.93, respectively, better than any reported in the literature. TPR, wtACC, AUC and G were highest for WSVM, showing that it performed best. All three models are precise enough to identify groups at high risk of CHD. They should all be considered for future investigations of other birth defects and diseases.

Indexed as

AdultAlgorithmsChinaCross-Sectional StudiesData MiningFemaleHeart Defects, CongenitalHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSupport Vector Machine

Identifiers

PMID28542318
PMCPMC5443514

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.