ArticleJournal of minimally invasive gynecology2025
Utilizing Artificial Intelligence: Machine Learning Algorithms to Develop a Preoperative Endometriosis Prediction Model.
Article in Journal of minimally invasive gynecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Superficial Peritoneal Endometriosis Beyond Surgical Diagnosis: A Narrative Review of Emerging Functional and Molecular Perspectives.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Interpretable machine learning for endometriosis classification: a rule-based approach.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Endometriosis and Chronic Endometritis: Shared Mechanisms, Diagnostic Challenges, and Clinical Implications in Infertility.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Shaping the future of abdominal and pelvic pain research with novel scientific and technological advances.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the predictive value of clinical features in the diagnosis of endometriosis by utilizing machine learning algorithms (MLAs), aiming to develop an accurate, explainable prediction model.
designRetrospective case-control study from 2011 to 2022.
settingTertiary referral center specializing in pelvic pain and minimally invasive gynecologic surgery.
participantsAll women aged 18 to 55 undergoing laparoscopic or robot-assisted excision of lesions of the ovary, pelvic viscera, or peritoneal surface by a single surgeon from 2011 to 2022. Exclusion criteria included women who required emergent surgery, as well as those lacking surgical specimens submitted for pathological analysis or a documented preoperative pelvic examination.
interventionsA total of 209 clinical features, including demographics, presenting symptoms, gynecologic/obstetric history, and physical exam findings, were analyzed as predictors of endometriosis. The primary outcome was model performance in predicting endometriosis, evaluated using accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Feature importance was assessed using Shapley Additive Explanation values.
resultsAmong 788 participants, 654 (83%) had pathology-confirmed endometriosis. The MLA, extreme gradient boosting, achieved an accuracy of 83%, sensitivity of 96%, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81. Shapley Additive Explanation analysis identified key predictors, including emesis (141 [21.56%] vs 10 [7.46%], p < .001), crampy pain (325 [49.69%] vs 38 [28.36%], p < .001), regular periods (429 [65.60%] vs 60 [44.78%], p < .001), severity of dysmenorrhea (0-3 Likert scale) (3 [1, 2] vs 3 [1, 2] p = .02), and retrocervical tenderness on rectovaginal exam (126 [19.27%] vs 7 [5.22%], p < .001).
conclusionThis study demonstrates that MLAs have potential to predict endometriosis preoperatively utilizing clinical features. Identified predictors, such as retrocervical tenderness, crampy pain, and regular periods, can aid primary care providers in early recognition and referral. Further validation in diverse populations is necessary to develop a widely applicable clinical prediction tool.
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.