Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39856162›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Comparative analysis of machine learning approaches for predicting the risk of vaginal laxity.

Hongguo Zhao, Peng Liu, Fei Chen, Mengjuan Wang, Jiaxi Liu, Xiling Fu, Hang Yu, Manman Nai, Lei Li, Xinbin Li

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Hongguo ZhaoThe Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, People's Republic of China.
Peng LiuThe Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, People's Republic of China.
Fei ChenThe Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, People's Republic of China.
Mengjuan WangThe Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, People's Republic of China.
Jiaxi LiuThe Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, People's Republic of China.
Xiling FuThe Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, People's Republic of China.
Hang YuThe Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, People's Republic of China.
Manman NaiThe Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, People's Republic of China.
Lei LiThe Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, People's Republic of China. beileili2004@126.com.
Xinbin LiSchool of Marine Science and Technology, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an, 710072, People's Republic of China. xinbin_l@163.com.

Funding

He'nan Educational Committee 24A320036
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study develops predictive models for Chinese female patients with VL utilizing machine learning techniques. The aim is to create an effective model that can assist in clinical diagnosis and treatment of vaginal relaxation, thereby enhancing women's pelvic floor health. In total, 1184 women with VL have been randomly selected and categorized into groups using the finger measurement method. Among them, there are 383 cases of mild VL, 405 cases of moderate VL, and 396 cases of severe VL. Concurrently, 396 healthy women without VL who underwent routine health examinations have been chosen at random and assigned to the non-VL group. Based on 1580 cases, we have established LightGBM, Random Forest, XGBoost, and AdaBoost models based on training dataset using 5-fold cross-validation and GridSearch, and analyzed the performance of the models on the hold-out test dataset. The confusion matrix, precision, recall, F1 score, overall accuracy, and ROC curve of the models on the hold-out test dataset are compared. The overall accuracy of LightGBM model, RF model, XGBoost model, and AdaBoost model are 0.8987, 0.8987, 0.8987, and 0.8457, respectively. The average AUC of LightGBM model is 0.976, the one of RF model is 0.9763, the one of XGBoost model is 0.9775, and the one of AdaBoost model is 0.928. The XGBoost model has the more comprehensive and reasonable performance among the four prediction models, which can accurately distinguish between healthy, mild VL, as well as moderate VL and severe VL, which can assist doctors in diagnosing persons' conditions more accurately, devising personalized treatment plans, avoiding unnecessary surgeries, reducing persons' psychological stress, improving patient compliance and treatment outcomes, thus enhancing overall treatment results.

Indexed as

Machine LearningVaginaAdultFemaleHumansMiddle AgedROC CurveMachine learningModified Oxford muscle strength gradingPelvic floor pressure assessmentVaginal laxity

Identifiers

PMID39856162
PMCPMC11760964

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.