ArticleBMJ open2021
Validating machine learning models for the prediction of labour induction intervention using routine data: a registry-based retrospective cohort study at a tertiary hospital in northern Tanzania.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data science and artificial intelligence for maternal, newborn and child health: scoping review and thematic analysis.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Review
- Predicting vaginal delivery after labor induction using machine learning: Development of a multivariable prediction model.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Ensemble learning for fetal ultrasound and maternal-fetal data to predict mode of delivery after labor induction.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe aimed at identifying the important variables for labour induction intervention and assessing the predictive performance of machine learning algorithms.
settingWe analysed the birth registry data from a referral hospital in northern Tanzania. Since July 2000, every birth at this facility has been recorded in a specific database.
participants21 578 deliveries between 2000 and 2015 were included. Deliveries that lacked information regarding the labour induction status were excluded. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Deliveries involving labour induction intervention.
resultsParity, maternal age, body mass index, gestational age and birth weight were all found to be important predictors of labour induction. Boosting method demonstrated the best discriminative performance (area under curve, AUC=0.75: 95% CI (0.73 to 0.76)) while logistic regression presented the least (AUC=0.71: 95% CI (0.70 to 0.73)). Random forest and boosting algorithms showed the highest net-benefits as per the decision curve analysis.
conclusionAll of the machine learning algorithms performed well in predicting the likelihood of labour induction intervention. Further optimisation of these classifiers through hyperparameter tuning may result in an improved performance. Extensive research into the performance of other classifier algorithms is warranted.
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.