Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39834976›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Prediction of Preeclampsia Using Machine Learning: A Systematic Review.

Vinayak Malik, Neha Agrawal, Sonal Prasad, Sukriti Talwar, Ritu Khatuja, Sandhya Jain, Nidhi Prabha Sehgal, Neeru Malik, Jeewant Khatuja, Nikita Madan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

10 authors.

Vinayak MalikComputer Science, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA.
Neha AgrawalObstetrics and Gynecology, Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital and Medical College, New Delhi, IND.
Sonal PrasadObstetrics and Gynecology, Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital and Medical College, New Delhi, IND.
Sukriti TalwarComputer Science, Delhi Technological University, New Delhi, IND.
Ritu KhatujaObstetrics and Gynecology, Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital and Medical College, New Delhi, IND.
Sandhya JainObstetrics and Gynecology, Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital and Medical College, New Delhi, IND.
Nidhi Prabha SehgalAnesthesiology and Critical Care, Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital and Medical College, New Delhi, IND.
Neeru MalikObstetrics and Gynecology, Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Medical College and Hospital, New Delhi, IND.
Jeewant KhatujaAutomation and Robotics, University School of Automation and Robotics, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, New Delhi, IND.
Nikita MadanObstetrics and Gynecology, ESI Hospital and Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (PGIMER) Basaidarapur, New Delhi, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Preeclampsia is one of the leading causes of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. Early prediction is the need of the hour so that interventions like aspirin prophylaxis can be started. Nowadays, machine learning (ML) is increasingly being used to predict the disease and its prognosis. This review explores the methodologies, predictors, and performance of ML models for preeclampsia prediction, emphasizing their comparative advantages, challenges, and clinical applicability. We conducted a systematic search of databases including PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus for studies published in the last 10 years using terms such as "preeclampsia", "risk factors", "machine learning", "artificial intelligence", and "deep learning". Words and phrases were selected using MeSH, a controlled vocabulary. Appropriate articles were selected using Boolean operators "OR" and "AND". The database search yielded 325 records. After removing duplicates and non-English articles, and completing a title and abstract search 55 research articles were assessed for eligibility of which 11 were included in this review. The risk of bias was found to be high in three of the studies and low in the rest. Clinicodemographic characteristics, laboratory reports, Doppler ultrasound, and some innovative ones like genotypic data and fundal images were predictors used to train ML models. More than ten different ML models were used in the 11 studies from diverse countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, China, and Korea. The area under the curve varied from 0.76 to 0.97. ML algorithms such as extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), random forest, and neural networks consistently demonstrated superior predictive accuracy Non-interpretable or black box ML models may not find clinical application on ethical grounds. The future of preeclampsia prediction using ML lies in balancing model performance with interpretability. Human oversight remains indispensable in implementing and interpreting these models to achieve better maternal outcomes. Further research and validation across diverse populations are critical to establishing the universal applicability of these promising ML-based approaches.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencedeep learningmachine learningpreeclampsiarisk of biassystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39834976
PMCPMC11743919

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.