ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2024
Predicting preterm birth using auto-ML frameworks: a large observational study using electronic inpatient discharge data.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning to predict adverse perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Systematic evaluation of machine learning models for clinical risk prediction on real-world hospital datasets.iScience · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in preterm birth prediction: a narrative review of current approaches and clinical applicability.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2026Review
- Machine learning-based prediction algorithm of spontaneous preterm birth using multi-source data.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Borrowing From the Future: Enhancing Early Risk Assessment through Contrastive Learning.Proceedings of machine learning research · 2025Article
- Comparison of Deep Learning and Traditional Machine Learning Models for Predicting Mild Cognitive Impairment Using Plasma Proteomic Biomarkers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Predictive analytics in bronchopulmonary dysplasia: past, present, and future.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Review
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
Background: To develop and compare different AutoML frameworks and machine learning models to predict premature birth. Methods: The study used a large electronic medical record database to include 715,962 participants who had the principal diagnosis code of childbirth. Three Automatic Machine Learning (AutoML) were used to construct machine learning models including tree-based models, ensembled models, and deep neural networks on the training sample ( Results: The H2O AutoML framework had the highest median AUC of 0.846, followed by AutoGluon (median AUC: 0.840) and Auto-sklearn (median AUC: 0.820), and the median training time was the lowest for H2O AutoML (0.14 min), followed by AutoGluon (0.16 min) and Auto-sklearn (4.33 min). Among different types of machine learning models, the Gradient Boosting Machines (GBM) or Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), stacked ensemble, and random forrest models had better predictive performance, with median AUC scores being 0.846, 0.846, and 0.842, respectively. Important features related to preterm birth included premature rupture of membrane (PROM), incompetent cervix, occupation, and preeclampsia. Conclusions: Our study highlights the potential of machine learning models in predicting the risk of preterm birth using readily available electronic medical record data, which have significant implications for improving prenatal care and outcomes.
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.