ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Presenting a prediction model for HELLP syndrome through data mining.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe HELLP syndrome represents three complications: hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count. Since the causes and pathogenesis of HELLP syndrome are not yet fully known and well understood, distinguishing it from other pregnancy-related disorders is complicated. Furthermore, late diagnosis leads to a delay in treatment, which challenges disease management. The present study aimed to present a machine learning (ML) attitude for diagnosing HELLP syndrome based on non-invasive parameters.
methodThis cross-sectional study was conducted on 384 patients in Tajrish Hospital, Tehran, Iran, during 2010-2021 in four stages. In the first stage, data elements were identified using a literature review and Delphi method. Then, patient records were gathered, and in the third stage, the dataset was preprocessed and prepared for modeling. Finally, ML models were implemented, and their evaluation metrics were compared.
resultsA total of 21 variables were included in this study after the first stage. Among all the ML algorithms, multi-layer perceptron and deep learning performed the best, with an F1 score of more than 99%.In all three evaluation scenarios of 5fold and 10fold cross-validation, the K-nearest neighbors (KNN), random forest (RF), AdaBoost, XGBoost, and logistic regression (LR) had an F1 score of over 0.95, while this value was around 0.90 for support vector machine (SVM), and the lowest values were below 0.90 for decision tree (DT). According to the modeling output, some variables, such as platelet, gestational age, and alanine aminotransferase (ALT), were the most important in diagnosing HELLP syndrome.
conclusionThe present work indicated that ML algorithms can be used successfully in the development of HELLP syndrome diagnosis models. Other algorithms besides DTs have an F1 score above 0.90. In addition, this study demonstrated that biomarker features (among all features) have the most significant impact on the diagnosis of HELLP syndrome.
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.