ArticleLupus science & medicine2022
Adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with systemic lupus erythematosus: can we improve predictions with machine learning?
Article in Lupus science & medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the Performance of Traditional Pharmacoepidemiologic and Machine Learning Models to Predict Pregnancies at Risk of Major Congenital Malformations.Birth defects research · 2026Article
- Systemic lupus erythematosus and pregnancy: a comprehensive clinical review of maternal, fetal, and treatment considerations.Advances in rheumatology (London, England) · 2026Review
- Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes in Women With Immune Abnormalities: Machine Learning Model Development and Validation Using First-Trimester Sonographic Features.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Validity and applicability of machine learning models for systemic lupus erythematosus diagnosis.Lupus science & medicine · 2026Article
- Comprehensive analysis of predictive models for disease manifestations and case fatality in systemic lupus erythematosus.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Review
- Comparative analysis of machine learning approaches for predicting the risk of vaginal laxity.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Understanding the Pathophysiology of Preeclampsia: Exploring the Role of Antiphospholipid Antibodies and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Systemic lupus in the era of machine learning medicine.Lupus science & medicine · 2024Review
- Maternal-fetal outcomes in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, with consideration of comorbidities: a retrospective cohort study in a large U.S. healthcare system.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Advances in Mass Spectrometry-Based Blood Metabolomics Profiling for Non-Cancer Diseases: A Comprehensive Review.Metabolites · 2024Review
- Machine learning approaches to identify systemic lupus erythematosus in anti-nuclear antibody-positive patients using genomic data and electronic health records.BioData mining · 2024Article
- Predicting risk of preterm birth in singleton pregnancies using machine learning algorithms.Frontiers in big data · 2024Article
- Article
- Application of Machine Learning Models in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Editorial: eDiagnostics and monitoring for precision endocrinology.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesNearly 20% of pregnancies in patients with SLE result in an adverse pregnancy outcome (APO). We previously developed an APO prediction model using logistic regression and data from Predictors of pRegnancy Outcome: bioMarkers In Antiphospholipid Antibody Syndrome and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (PROMISSE), a large multicentre study of pregnant women with mild/moderate SLE and/or antiphospholipid antibodies. Our goal was to determine whether machine learning (ML) approaches improve APO prediction and identify other risk factors.
methodsThe PROMISSE data included 41 predictors from 385 subjects; 18.4% had APO (preterm delivery due to placental insufficiency/pre-eclampsia, fetal/neonatal death, fetal growth restriction). Logistic regression with stepwise selection (LR-S), least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), random forest (RF), neural network (NN), support vector machines (SVM-RBF), gradient boosting (GB) and SuperLearner (SL) were compared by cross-validated area under the ROC curve (AUC) and calibration.
resultsPreviously identified APO risk factors, antihypertensive medication use, low platelets, SLE disease activity and lupus anticoagulant (LAC), were confirmed as important with each algorithm. LASSO additionally revealed potential interactions between LAC and anticardiolipin IgG, among others. SL performed the best (AUC=0.78), but was statistically indistinguishable from LASSO, SVM-RBF and RF (AUC=0.77 for all). LR-S, NN and GB had worse AUC (0.71-0.74) and calibration scores.
conclusionsWe predicted APO with reasonable accuracy using variables routinely assessed prior to the 12th week of pregnancy. LASSO and some ML methods performed better than a standard logistic regression approach. Substantial improvement in APO prediction will likely be realised, not with increasingly complex algorithms but by the discovery of new biomarkers and APO risk factors.
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.