ArticleScientific reports2025
Automated interpretation of cardiotocography using deep learning in a nationwide multicenter study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- MIRF-Net: A Multimodal Data Fusion Framework for Intrapartum Fetal Risk Assessment.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Clinical utility assessment framework for machine learning-based fetal health classification in cardiotocography: an observational study.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2026Article
- Objective interpretation of intrapartum cardiotocography images using attention-guided convolutional neural networks.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- AI-driven high-risk pregnancy prediction: balancing early detection, anxiety, and discrimination in digital public health.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Prediction of Neonatal Length of Stay in High-Risk Pregnancies Using Regression-Based Machine Learning on Computerized Cardiotocography Data.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
- Development of a novel artificial intelligence algorithm for interpreting fetal heart rate and uterine activity data in cardiotocography.Frontiers in digital health · 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
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Timely detection of abnormal cardiotocography (CTG) during labor plays a crucial role in enhancing fetal prognosis. Recent research has explored the use of deep learning for CTG interpretation, most studies rely on small, localized datasets or focus on outcomes less relevant to clinical practice. To address these limitations, we developed a clinically applicable model using a large-scale, nationwide CTG dataset with reliable annotations provided by a board-certified obstetrician. Our study utilized 22,522 deliveries from 14 hospitals, each including cardiotocography (CTG) recordings of up to 75 min in length. The CTG signals were segmented into 5-minute intervals, resulting in a total of 519,800 person-minutes of analyzed data. We trained and validated a deep learning model based on CTG segments for classifying normal and abnormal CTGs. In the independent test dataset, the model achieved an AUC (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) of 0.880 and PRC (area under the precision-recall curve) of 0.625 in internal tests. External tests across three datasets achieved AUCs of 0.862, 0.895, and 0.862 and PRCs of 0.553, 0.615, and 0.601. Our study results show the potential of the deep learning for automated CTG interpretation. We will evaluate this model in future prospective studies to assess the model's clinical applicability.
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.