Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39078567›Full record

SynthesisReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2025

Machine Learning for Predicting Stillbirth: A Systematic Review.

Qingyuan Li, Pan Li, Junyu Chen, Ruyu Ren, Ni Ren, Yinyin Xia

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Ancillary and Advanced Techniques for the Postmortem Examination.Pediatric and developmental pathology : the official journal of the Society for Pediatric Pathology and the Paediatric Pathology Society
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Qingyuan LiDepartment of Clinical Medicine, International Medical College of Chongqing Medical University, Yixueyuan Road No.1, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Pan LiDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Southwest Medical University, Zhongshan Road, No.319 Section 3, Luzhou, 646000, China.
Junyu ChenSchool of Public Health, Chongqing Medical University, Yixueyuan Road No.1, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Ruyu RenSchool of Public Health, Chongqing Medical University, Yixueyuan Road No.1, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Ni RenSchool of Public Health, Chongqing Medical University, Yixueyuan Road No.1, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Yinyin XiaSchool of Public Health, Chongqing Medical University, Yixueyuan Road No.1, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China. 100118@cqmu.edu.cn.ORCID 0009-0004-0788-4803

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stillbirth is a major global issue, with over 5 million cases each year. The multifactorial nature of stillbirth makes it difficult to predict. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have the potential to enhance clinical decision-making and enable precise assessments. This study reviewed the literature on predictive ML models for stillbirth highlighting input characteristics, performance metrics, and validation. The PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were searched for studies using AI to develop predictive models for stillbirth. Findings were analyzed qualitatively using narrative synthesis and graphics. Risk of bias and the applicability of the studies were assessed using PROBAST. Model design and performance were discussed. Eight studies involving 14,840,654 women with gestational ages ranging from 20 weeks to full term were included in the qualitative analysis. Most studies used neural networks, random forests, and logistic regression algorithms. The number of predictive features varied from 14 to 53. Only 50% of studies validated the models. Cross-validation was commonly employed, and only 25% of studies performed external validation. All studies reported area under the curve as a performance metric (range 0.54-0.9), and five studies reported sensitivity (range, 60- 90%) and specificity (range, 64 - 93.3%). A stacked ensemble model that analyzed 53 features performed better than other models (AUC = 0.9; sensitivity and specificity > 85%). Available ML models can attain a considerable degree of accuracy for prediction of stillbirth; however, these models require further development before they can be applied in a clinical setting.

Indexed as

Machine LearningStillbirthFemaleHumansPredictive Value of TestsPregnancyMachine learningPredictionPregnant womenStillbirth

Identifiers

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.