SynthesisReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2025
Machine Learning for Predicting Stillbirth: A Systematic Review.
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.
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.
- Machine learning to predict adverse perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence's Role in Improving Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes: A Scoping Review and Consideration of Ethical Issues.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- The Application of Machine Learning Models to Predict Stillbirths.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- 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 SocietyReview
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
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
Identifiers
39078567What 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.