ArticlePediatric research2026
Machine learning risk stratification for high-risk infant follow-up of term and late preterm infants.
Article in Pediatric research, 2026. 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.
- Barriers and facilitators to neurodevelopmental follow-up among at-risk newborns across Washington State.Research square · 2026Article
- [Research progress in artificial intelligence for the diagnosis and management of diseases in preterm infants].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2026Review
- Differential item functioning in neonatal behavioral neurological assessment in high-risk full-term infants in NICU based on a machine learning approach.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- A Decision Tree-Driven IoT systems for improved pre-natal diagnostic accuracy.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTerm and late preterm infants are not routinely referred to high-risk infant follow-up programs at neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) discharge. We aimed to identify NICU factors associated with abnormal developmental screening and develop a risk-stratification model using machine learning for high-risk infant follow-up enrollment.
methodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study identifying abnormal developmental screening prior to 6 years of age in infants born ≥34 weeks gestation admitted to a level IV NICU. Five machine learning models using NICU predictors were developed by classification and regression tree (CART), random forest, gradient boosting TreeNet, multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS), and regularized logistic regression analysis. Performance metrics included sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, precision, and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC).
resultsWithin this cohort, 87% (1183/1355) received developmental screening, and 47% had abnormal results. Common NICU predictors across all models were oral (PO) feeding, follow-up appointments, and medications prescribed at NICU discharge. Each model resulted in an AUC > 0.7, specificity >70%, and sensitivity >60%.
conclusionStratification of developmental risk in term and late preterm infants is possible utilizing machine learning. Applying machine learning algorithms allows for targeted expansion of high-risk infant follow-up criteria. IMPACT: This study addresses the gap in knowledge of developmental outcomes of infants ≥34 weeks gestation requiring neonatal intensive care. Machine learning methodology can be used to stratify early childhood developmental risk for these term and late preterm infants. Applying the classification and regression tree (CART) algorithm described in the study allows for targeted expansion of high-risk infant follow-up enrollment to include those term and late preterm infants who may benefit most.
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.