ArticleProceedings of machine learning research2021
A Generative Modeling Approach to Calibrated Predictions: A Use Case on Menstrual Cycle Length Prediction.
Article in Proceedings of machine learning research, 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Benchmarking machine learning architectures for menstrual recovery prediction using physiologically informed synthetic wearable data.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A Foundation Model for Capturing Complexity of Menstrual Health Data.npj women's health · 2026Article
- The messiness of the menstruator: assessing personas and functionalities of menstrual tracking apps.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Review
- A predictive model for next cycle start date that accounts for adherence in menstrual self-tracking.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We explore how to quantify uncertainty when designing predictive models for healthcare to provide well-calibrated results. Uncertainty quantification and calibration are critical in medicine, as one must not only accommodate the variability of the underlying physiology, but adjust to the uncertain data collection and reporting process. This occurs not only on the context of electronic health records (i.e., the clinical documentation process), but on mobile health as well (i.e., user specific self-tracking patterns must be accounted for). In this work, we show that accurate uncertainty estimation is directly relevant to an important health application: the prediction of menstrual cycle length, based on self-tracked information. We take advantage of a flexible generative model that accommodates under-dispersed distributions via two degrees of freedom to fit the mean and variance of the observed cycle lengths. From a machine learning perspective, our work showcases how flexible generative models can not only provide state-of-the art predictive accuracy, but enable well-calibrated predictions. From a healthcare perspective, we demonstrate that with flexible generative models, not only can we accommodate the idiosyncrasies of mobile health data, but we can also adjust the predictive uncertainty to per-user cycle length patterns. We evaluate the proposed model in real-world cycle length data collected by one of the most popular menstrual trackers worldwide, and demonstrate how the proposed generative model provides accurate and well-calibrated cycle length predictions. Providing meaningful, less uncertain cycle length predictions is beneficial for menstrual health researchers, mobile health users and developers, as it may help design more usable mobile health solutions.
Identifiers
35072087PMC8782440W4207091397What 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.