ArticleJMIR medical informatics2020
Prediction of Preeclampsia and Intrauterine Growth Restriction: Development of Machine Learning Models on a Prospective Cohort.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors related to postpartum length of stay in women with pre-eclampsia: a systematic review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Pooled it
- Strategic Guidelines to Integrate Artificial Intelligence in Obstetrics and Gynecology: Best Practices and Ethical Considerations.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2025Guideline
- Machine Learning Algorithms Versus Classical Regression Models in Pre-Eclampsia Prediction: A Systematic Review.Current hypertension reports · 2024Pooled it
- AI in Childbirth and Emerging Alternatives to Traditional Fertility Treatments.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2026Review
- AI in Childbirth and Emerging Alternatives to Traditional Fertility Treatments.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2026Review
- An Explainable Fuzzy Framework for Assessing Preeclampsia Classification.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Current progress and future prospects of machine learning in the diagnosis of neonatal encephalopathy: a narrative review.Translational pediatrics · 2025Review
- Application of artificial intelligence in diagnosis and management of fetal growth disorders: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Preeclampsia prediction via machine learning: a systematic literature review.Health systems (Basingstoke, England) · 2025Review
- A Prospective Study on Risk Prediction of Preeclampsia Using Bi-Platform Calibration and Machine Learning.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Review
- A Theoretical Exploration of Artificial Intelligence's Impact on Feto-Maternal Health from Conception to Delivery.International journal of women's health · 2024Review
- Prediction Models for Intrauterine Growth Restriction Using Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Questionnaire-free machine-learning method to predict depressive symptoms among community-dwelling older adults.PloS one · 2023Article
- Machine learning applied in maternal and fetal health: a narrative review focused on pregnancy diseases and complications.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Review
- Data-Driven Medicine in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Infertility.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Development of early prediction model for pregnancy-associated hypertension with graph-based semi-supervised learning.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Sex differences in microRNA expression in first and third trimester human placenta†.Biology of reproduction · 2022Article
- Interpreting the role of nuchal fold for fetal growth restriction prediction using machine learning.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Comparison of machine learning and logistic regression as predictive models for adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes of preeclampsia: A retrospective study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreeclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction are placental dysfunction-related disorders (PDDs) that require a referral decision be made within a certain time period. An appropriate prediction model should be developed for these diseases. However, previous models did not demonstrate robust performances and/or they were developed from datasets with highly imbalanced classes.
objectiveIn this study, we developed a predictive model of PDDs by machine learning that uses features at 24-37 weeks' gestation, including maternal characteristics, uterine artery (UtA) Doppler measures, soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase receptor-1 (sFlt-1), and placental growth factor (PlGF).
methodsA public dataset was taken from a prospective cohort study that included pregnant women with PDDs (66/95, 69%) and a control group (29/95, 31%). Preliminary selection of features was based on a statistical analysis using SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute). We used Weka (Waikato Environment for Knowledge Analysis) 3.8.3 (The University of Waikato, Hamilton, NZ) to automatically select the best model using its optimization algorithm. We also manually selected the best of 23 white-box models. Models, including those from recent studies, were also compared by interval estimation of evaluation metrics. We used the Matthew correlation coefficient (MCC) as the main metric. It is not overoptimistic to evaluate the performance of a prediction model developed from a dataset with a class imbalance. Repeated 10-fold cross-validation was applied.
resultsThe classification via regression model was chosen as the best model. Our model had a robust MCC (.93, 95% CI .87-1.00, vs .64, 95% CI .57-.71) and specificity (100%, 95% CI 100-100, vs 90%, 95% CI 90-90) compared to each metric of the best models from recent studies. The sensitivity of this model was not inferior (95%, 95% CI 91-100, vs 100%, 95% CI 92-100). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was also competitive (0.970, 95% CI 0.966-0.974, vs 0.987, 95% CI 0.980-0.994). Features in the best model were maternal weight, BMI, pulsatility index of the UtA, sFlt-1, and PlGF. The most important feature was the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio. This model used an M5P algorithm consisting of a decision tree and four linear models with different thresholds. Our study was also better than the best ones among recent studies in terms of the class balance and the size of the case class (66/95, 69%, vs 27/239, 11.3%).
conclusionsOur model had a robust predictive performance. It was also developed to deal with the problem of a class imbalance. In the context of clinical management, this model may improve maternal mortality and neonatal morbidity and reduce health care costs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.