Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32168227›Full record

ArticleObstetrics and gynecology2020

Machine Learning and Statistical Models to Predict Postpartum Hemorrhage.

Kartik K Venkatesh, Robert A Strauss, Chad A Grotegut, R Philip Heine, Nancy C Chescheir, Jeffrey S A Stringer, David M Stamilio, Katherine M Menard, J Eric Jelovsek

Abstract readEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Obstetrics and gynecology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing 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

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

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

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Kartik K VenkateshDepartments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, Duke University, Durham, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Robert A Strauss
Chad A Grotegut
R Philip Heine
Nancy C Chescheir
Jeffrey S A Stringer
David M Stamilio
Katherine M Menard
J Eric Jelovsek

Funding

Consortium on Safe LaborZIAHD008794 · NICHD · EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT · PI GRANTZ, KATHERINE · 2009 to 2022
$3.2M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA HD008794NICHD NIH HHS HHSN267200603425C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo predict a woman's risk of postpartum hemorrhage at labor admission using machine learning and statistical models.

methodsPredictive models were constructed and compared using data from 10 of 12 sites in the U.S. Consortium for Safe Labor Study (2002-2008) that consistently reported estimated blood loss at delivery. The outcome was postpartum hemorrhage, defined as an estimated blood loss at least 1,000 mL. Fifty-five candidate risk factors routinely available on labor admission were considered. We used logistic regression with and without lasso regularization (lasso regression) as the two statistical models, and random forest and extreme gradient boosting as the two machine learning models to predict postpartum hemorrhage. Model performance was measured by C statistics (ie, concordance index), calibration, and decision curves. Models were constructed from the first phase (2002-2006) and externally validated (ie, temporally) in the second phase (2007-2008). Further validation was performed combining both temporal and site-specific validation.

resultsOf the 152,279 assessed births, 7,279 (4.8%, 95% CI 4.7-4.9) had postpartum hemorrhage. All models had good-to-excellent discrimination. The extreme gradient boosting model had the best discriminative ability to predict postpartum hemorrhage (C statistic: 0.93; 95% CI 0.92-0.93), followed by random forest (C statistic: 0.92; 95% CI 0.91-0.92). The lasso regression model (C statistic: 0.87; 95% CI 0.86-0.88) and logistic regression (C statistic: 0.87; 95% CI 0.86-0.87) had lower-but-good discriminative ability. The above results held with validation across both time and sites. Decision curve analysis demonstrated that, although all models provided superior net benefit when clinical decision thresholds were between 0% and 80% predicted risk, the extreme gradient boosting model provided the greatest net benefit.

conclusionPostpartum hemorrhage on labor admission can be predicted with excellent discriminative ability using machine learning and statistical models. Further clinical application is needed, which may assist health care providers to be prepared and triage at-risk women.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesLabor, ObstetricCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMachine LearningModels, StatisticalPostpartum HemorrhagePredictive Value of TestsPregnancyRisk AssessmentTriageUnited States

Identifiers

PMID32168227
PMCPMC7236480

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.