ArticlePloS one2024
Predicting adverse pregnancy outcome in Rwanda using machine learning techniques.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
- Development of machine learning models for predicting early pregnancy outcomes based on β-hCG, progesterone, and estradiol.PloS one · 2026Article
- Factors associated with prior pregnancy loss among multigravid women: a retrospective machine learning analysis from an African population cohort.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026Article
- Telehealth for all: Rwanda's digital leap in sexual and reproductive healthcare access.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2025Article
- Prediction of adverse pregnancy outcomes using machine learning techniques: evidence from analysis of electronic medical records data in Rwanda.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdverse pregnancy outcomes pose significant risk to maternal and neonatal health, contributing to morbidity, mortality, and long-term developmental challenges. This study aimed to predict these outcomes in Rwanda using supervised machine learning algorithms.
methodsThis cross-sectional study utilized data from the Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey (RDHS, 2019-2020) involving 14,634 women. K-fold cross-validation (k = 10) and synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) were used to manage dataset partitioning and class imbalance. Descriptive and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify the prevalence and risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes. Seven machine learning algorithms were assessed for their accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, and area under the curve (AUC).
resultsOf the pregnancies analyzed, 93.4% resulted in live births, while 4.5% ended in miscarriage, and 2.1% in stillbirth. Advanced maternal age(>30 years),women aged 30-34 years (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 5.755; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.085-10.074; p < 0.001), 35-39 years (AOR = 8.458; 95% CI = 4.507-10.571; p < 0.001), 40-44 years (AOR = 11.86; 95% CI = 6.250-21.842; p < 0.001), and 45-49 years (AOR = 14.233; 95% CI = 7.359-25.922; p < 0.001), compared to those aged 15-19 years, and multiple unions (polyandry) (AOR = 1.320; 95% CI = 1.104-1.573, p = 0.002), and women not visited by healthcare provider during pregnancy (AOR = 1.421; 95%CI = 1.300-1.611, p<0.001) were factors associated with an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. In contrast, being married (AOR = 0.894; 95% CI = 0.787-0.966) and attending at least two antenatal care (ANC) visits (AOR = 0.801; 95% CI = 0.664-0.961) were linked to reduced risk. The K-nearest neighbors (KNN) model outperformed other ML Models in predicting adverse pregnancy outcomes, achieving 86% accuracy, 89% precision, 97% recall, 93% F1 score, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.842. The ML models constantly highlighted that woman with advanced maternal age, those in multiple unions, and inadequate ANC were more susceptible to adverse pregnancy outcomes.
conclusionsMachine learning algorithms, particularly KNN, are effective in predicting adverse pregnancy outcomes, facilitating early intervention and improved maternal and neonatal care.
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.