ArticlePediatric research2026
Early prediction of bronchopulmonary dysplasia: comparison of modelling methods, development and validation studies.
Article in Pediatric research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence and digital technologies transforming neonatal respiratory assessment: a scoping review.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Review
- Mapping the evolving landscape: a bibliometric analysis of macrophages research in bronchopulmonary dysplasia (1990-2025)-a Web of Science Core Collection-based study.Translational pediatrics · 2026Article
- Video-based artificial intelligence for automated neonatal respiratory monitoring.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- A Respiratory Intervention Intensity Index for Supplemental Oxygen Use at Postnatal Day 28 in Preterm Infants Using BWQS Regression: Incremental Stratification Beyond Gestational Age in a Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Enhancing bronchopulmonary dysplasia prediction in preterm infants using artificial intelligence and multimodal data integration.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMachine-learning methods are gaining in popularity to predict medical events but their added value to other methods is still to be determined. We compared performances of clinical prediction models for bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) or death in very preterm infants using logistic regression and random forests methods.
methodsTwo population-based cohorts of very preterm infants were used: EPIPAGE-2 (France, 2011) for development and internal validation and EPICE (Europe, 2011) for external validation. Eligible infants were born before 30 weeks' gestation and admitted in neonatal units. BPD was defined as any respiratory support at 36 weeks postmenstrual age. Candidate predictors were available shortly after birth or at day 3. Logistic regression and random forest models performance was assessed in terms of discrimination (c-statistic) and calibration plots.
resultsPrevalence of BPD/death was 32.1% (668/1923) in EPIPAGE-2 and 41.0% (1368/3335) in EPICE. At both time points, logistic regression and random forest models showed similar performance during internal validation. At birth, external validation in EPICE showed good discrimination (logistic regression model: c-statistics 0.81, 95% CI 0.80-0.83; random forest: 0.80, 95% CI 0.79-0.81) but both models underestimated the probability of BPD/death. Model performances were heterogeneous throughout European regions.
conclusionsBoth modelling methods performed similarly to predict BPD/death shortly after birth in very preterm children. IMPACT: Whether machine-learning methods predict better short-term respiratory outcomes in very preterm infants than logistic regression models is debated. Random forest-based prediction models did not perform better than logistic regression to predict bronchopulmonary dysplasia or death shortly after birth in very preterm infants. Calibration performances varied among European countries. While offering the same performance, regression models are easier to understand, to disseminate and to apply to different populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40506584What 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.