ArticleAdvanced biomedical research2025
Predicting Pregnant Women's Abortion: Artificial Neural Network, Wavelet Neural Network and Adaptive Neural Fuzzy Inference System.
Article in Advanced biomedical research, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Abortion is an important and controversial issue and one of the important reasons for the mortality of pregnant women worldwide. This study aimed to predict the risk factors of abortion in pregnant women using artificial neural network, wavelet neural network, and adaptive neural fuzzy inference system. Materials and Methods: The study is an analytical-comparative modeling and data of 4437 pregnant women from the Ravansar Non-Communicable Disease (RaNCD) cohort study from 2014 to 2016 was used. First, six variables were chosen through the genetic algorithm approach, then artificial neural network (ANN), wavelet neural network (WNN), and adaptive neural fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) were run. Finally, the performance of the models was compared based on the evaluation criteria. All analyses were done in MATLAB R2019b software. Results: ANN with RMSE of 0.019 showed better performance than ANFIS and WNN with 0.42 and 1.445, respectively. Further, the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in ANN were 100%, 99%, and 100%, while in WNN, they were 76.2%, 76.4%, and 66.7%. However, when the researchers used three selected variables, the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity as well as RMSE in ANFIS were 100%, 100% 100%, and 0; 100%, 99%, 100%, and 0.021 in ANN; and finally 76.2%, 76.4%, 38.5%, and 1.553 in WNN. Conclusion: The models with six input variables indicated that the artificial neural network has a better performance than the other two models, but based on the three variables, the fuzzy neural inference system performed better than the other two models.
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.