ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Integrating SHAP analysis with machine learning to predict postpartum hemorrhage in vaginal births.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Artificial intelligence and predictive analytics in obstetric anesthesia: early warning for maternal complications.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence for postpartum hemorrhage: a systematic review.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026Review
- Development and validation of a postpartum hemorrhage risk prediction model for advanced maternal age women undergoing vaginal delivery: a comparison of multiple machine learning algorithms.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- An explainable machine learning framework for cardiovascular risk prediction using structured health data.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- An explainable machine learning model for predicting preterm birth in pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: development and external validation.Frontiers in endocrinology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to develop a machine learning (ML) model integrated with SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis to predict postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) following vaginal deliveries, offering a potential tool for personalized risk assessment and prevention in clinical settings.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study in Northeast China, including women who had vaginal deliveries at three tertiary hospitals from September 2018 to December 2023. Data were extracted from electronic medical records. The dataset was split into a training set (70%) and an internal validation set (30%) to prevent overfitting. External validation was performed on a separate dataset. Several evaluation metrics, including the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), were used to compare prediction performance. Features were ranked using SHAP, and the final model was explained.
resultsThe XGBoost model demonstrated superior predictive accuracy for PPH, with an AUC of 0.997 in the training set. SHAP value-based feature selection identified 15 key features contributing to the model's predictive power. SHAP dependence and summary plots provided intuitive insights into each feature's contribution, enabling the identification of anomalies. The final model maintained high predictive power, with an AUC of 0.894 in internal validation and 0.880 in external validation.
conclusionThis study successfully developed an interpretable ML model that predicts PPH with high accuracy. Future studies with larger and more diverse datasets are necessary to further validate and refine the model, particularly to assess its generalizability across different populations and healthcare settings.
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.