Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35024824›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2022

Predictive models of pregnancy based on data from a preconception cohort study.

Jennifer J Yland, Taiyao Wang, Zahra Zad, Sydney K Willis, Tanran R Wang, Amelia K Wesselink, Tammy Jiang, Elizabeth E Hatch, Lauren A Wise, Ioannis Ch Paschalidis

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jennifer J YlandDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7870-8971
Taiyao WangCenter for Information and Systems Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Zahra ZadCenter for Information and Systems Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Sydney K WillisDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6858-5450
Tanran R WangDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Amelia K WesselinkDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3929-4451
Tammy JiangDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Elizabeth E HatchDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Lauren A WiseDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Ioannis Ch PaschalidisCenter for Information and Systems Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Boston University · US

Funding

Project-005UL1TR001430 · NCATS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI BAIR-MERRITT, MEGAN H, CENTER, DAVID M. · 2015 to 2024
$52.3M
An internet-based preconception cohort study in North America and DenmarkR01HD086742 · NICHD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI LAUREN A WISE · 2016 to 2026
$6.7M
Optimizing and Learning Strategies for Protein Docking R01GM135930 · NIGMS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI VAKILI, PIROOZ · 2019 to 2021
$561k
Feasibility of an internet-based study of time-to-pregnancy in the United StatesR21HD072326 · NICHD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI WISE, LAUREN A · 2013 to 2014
$337k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001430NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD086742NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD072326NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM135930
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionCan we derive adequate models to predict the probability of conception among couples actively trying to conceive? SUMMARY ANSWER: Leveraging data collected from female participants in a North American preconception cohort study, we developed models to predict pregnancy with performance of ∼70% in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Earlier work has focused primarily on identifying individual risk factors for infertility. Several predictive models have been developed in subfertile populations, with relatively low discrimination (AUC: 59-64%). STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Study participants were female, aged 21-45 years, residents of the USA or Canada, not using fertility treatment, and actively trying to conceive at enrollment (2013-2019). Participants completed a baseline questionnaire at enrollment and follow-up questionnaires every 2 months for up to 12 months or until conception. We used data from 4133 participants with no more than one menstrual cycle of pregnancy attempt at study entry. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,

methodsOn the baseline questionnaire, participants reported data on sociodemographic factors, lifestyle and behavioral factors, diet quality, medical history and selected male partner characteristics. A total of 163 predictors were considered in this study. We implemented regularized logistic regression, support vector machines, neural networks and gradient boosted decision trees to derive models predicting the probability of pregnancy: (i) within fewer than 12 menstrual cycles of pregnancy attempt time (Model I), and (ii) within 6 menstrual cycles of pregnancy attempt time (Model II). Cox models were used to predict the probability of pregnancy within each menstrual cycle for up to 12 cycles of follow-up (Model III). We assessed model performance using the AUC and the weighted-F1 score for Models I and II, and the concordance index for Model III. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Model I and II AUCs were 70% and 66%, respectively, in parsimonious models, and the concordance index for Model III was 63%. The predictors that were positively associated with pregnancy in all models were: having previously breastfed an infant and using multivitamins or folic acid supplements. The predictors that were inversely associated with pregnancy in all models were: female age, female BMI and history of infertility. Among nulligravid women with no history of infertility, the most important predictors were: female age, female BMI, male BMI, use of a fertility app, attempt time at study entry and perceived stress. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Reliance on self-reported predictor data could have introduced misclassification, which would likely be non-differential with respect to the pregnancy outcome given the prospective design. In addition, we cannot be certain that all relevant predictor variables were considered. Finally, though we validated the models using split-sample replication techniques, we did not conduct an external validation study. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsGiven a wide range of predictor data, machine learning algorithms can be leveraged to analyze epidemiologic data and predict the probability of conception with discrimination that exceeds earlier work. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The research was partially supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation (under grants DMS-1664644, CNS-1645681 and IIS-1914792) and the National Institutes for Health (under grants R01 GM135930 and UL54 TR004130). In the last 3 years, L.A.W. has received in-kind donations for primary data collection in PRESTO from FertilityFriend.com, Kindara.com, Sandstone Diagnostics and Swiss Precision Diagnostics. L.A.W. also serves as a fibroid consultant to AbbVie, Inc. The other authors declare no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Indexed as

FertilityInfertilityCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMalePregnancyProspective StudiesSurveys and Questionnairesfecundabilityfertilitymachine learningpredictive analyticspregnancyprospective studies

Identifiers

PMID35024824
PMCPMC8888990
OpenAlexW4205914074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.