ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2025
Machine-Learning-Based Predictive Model for Bothersome Stress Urinary Incontinence Among Parous Women in Southeastern China.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a machine learning prediction model for overactive bladder in female nurses: the NURS study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Predicting De Novo Stress Urinary Incontinence After Colpocleisis Using Clinical and Pelvic Floor Ultrasound Parameters: Development and Internal Validation of a Multimodal Model.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Development of a psychosocial-clinical nomogram to predict delayed medical help-seeking in women with stress urinary incontinence: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisAccurate identification of female populations at high risk for urinary incontinence (UI) and early intervention are potentially effective initiatives to reduce the prevalence of UI. We aimed to apply machine-learning techniques to establish, internally validate, and provide interpretable risk assessment tools.
methodsData from a cross-sectional epidemiological survey of female urinary incontinence conducted in 2022 were used. Sociodemographic and obstetrics-related characteristics, comorbidities, and urinary incontinence questionnaire results were used to develop multiple prediction models. Seventy percent of the individuals in the study cohort were employed in model training, and the remainder were used for internal validation. Model performance was characterized by area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) and calibration curves, as well as Brier scores. The best-performing model was finally selected to develop an online prediction tool.
resultsThe results showed that bothersome stress urinary incontinence (BSUI) occurred in 9.6% (849 out of 8,830) of parous women. The XGBoost model achieved the best prediction performance (training set: AUC 0.796, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.778-0.815, validation set: AUC 0.720, 95% CI: 0.686-0.754). Additionally, the XGBoost model achieved the lowest (best) Brier score among the models, with sensitivity of 0.657, specificity of 0.690, accuracy of 0.688, positive predictive value of 0.231, and negative predictive value of 0.948. Based on this model, the top five risk factors for the development of BSUI among parous women were ranked as follows: body mass index, age, vaginal delivery, constipation, and maximum fetal birth weight. An online calculator was provided for clinical use.
conclusionThe application of machine-learning algorithms provides an acceptable, though not perfect, prediction of BSUI risk among parous women, requiring further validation and improvement in future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39585381What 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.