ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Leveraging Machine Learning to Predict and Assess Disparities in Severe Maternal Morbidity in Maryland.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundSevere maternal morbidity (SMM) is increasing in the United States. The main objective of this study is to test the use of machine learning (ML) techniques to develop models for predicting SMM during delivery hospitalizations in Maryland. Secondarily, we examine disparities in SMM by key sociodemographic characteristics.
methodsWe used the linked State Inpatient Database (SID) and the American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey data from Maryland for 2016-2019 (N = 261,226 delivery hospitalizations). We first estimated relative risks for SMM across key sociodemographic factors (e.g., race, income, insurance, and primary language). Then, we fitted LASSO and, for comparison, Logit models with 75 and 18 features. The selection of SMM features was based on clinical expert opinion, a literature review, statistical significance, and computational resource constraints. Various model performance metrics, including the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, precision, and recall values were computed to compare predictive performance.
resultsDuring 2016-2019, 76 per 10,000 deliveries (1976 of 261,226) were in patients who experienced an SMM event. The Logit model with a full list of 75 features achieved an AUC of 0.71 in the validation dataset, which marginally decreased to 0.69 in the reduced model with 18 features. The LASSO algorithm with the same 18 features demonstrated slightly superior predictive performance and an AUC of 0.80. We found significant disparities in SMM among patients living in low-income areas, with public insurance, and who were non-Hispanic Black or non-English speakers.
conclusionOur results demonstrate the feasibility of utilizing ML and administrative hospital discharge data for SMM prediction. The low recall score is a limitation across all models we compared, signifying that the algorithms struggle with identifying all SMM cases. This study identified substantial disparities in SMM across various sociodemographic factors. Addressing these disparities requires multifaceted interventions that include improving access to quality care, enhancing cultural competence among healthcare providers, and implementing policies that help mitigate social determinants of health.
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.