ArticleArchives of pathology & laboratory medicine2025
Machine Learning Assessment of Gestational Age in Accelerated Maturation, Delayed Maturation, Villous Edema, Chorangiosis, and Intrauterine Fetal Demise.
Article in Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Histopathologic Reassessment of Placental Vascular Lesions Based on the Amsterdam Consensus Criteria: A Retrospective Analysis of 571 Placental Cases.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- Benchmarking pathology foundation models for non-neoplastic pathology in the placenta.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Standardized Placental Pathology Reporting: Improving Quality and Clinical Utility Recommendations From the Society for Pediatric Pathology Placental Pathology Reporting Task Force.Pediatric and developmental pathology : the official journal of the Society for Pediatric Pathology and the Paediatric Pathology SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
CONTEXT.—: Assessment of placental villous maturation is among the most common tasks in perinatal pathology. However, the significance of abnormalities in morphology is unclear and interobserver variability is significant. OBJECTIVE.—: To develop a machine learning model of placental maturation across the second and third trimesters and quantify the impact of different pathologist-diagnosed abnormalities of villous morphology. DESIGN.—: Digitize placental villous slides from more than 2500 placentas at 12.0 to 42.6 weeks. Build whole slide learning models to estimate obstetrician-determined gestational age for cases with appropriate maturation and normal morphology. Define the model output as "placental age" and compare it to the chronologic gestational age. RESULTS.—: Our model showed an r2 of 0.864 and mean absolute error of 1.62 weeks for placentas with appropriate maturation in the test set. Pathologist diagnosis of accelerated maturation was associated with a 2.56-week increase in placental age (±2.91 weeks, P < .001), while delayed maturation was associated with a 0.92-week decrease in placental age (±1.82 weeks, P < .001). Intrauterine fetal demise causes diverse changes to placental age, driven by the nature of the demise. We tested the impact of training a model, using all live births. The resulting r2 was 0.874 and mean absolute error was 1.73 weeks. Furthermore, by including cases with abnormal maturation in the training data, the effect size of accelerated maturation was blunted to only 0.56 ± 2.35 weeks (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS.—: We show that various abnormalities of villous maturation and morphology correlate with abnormalities in placental age. This "no pathologist" model could be useful in situations where pathologists are unavailable or the need for consistency outweighs the utility of expertise.
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.