Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40520215›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025

Machine learning and explainable artificial intelligence to predict and interpret lead toxicity in pregnant women and unborn baby.

Priyanka Chaurasia, Pratheepan Yogarajah, Abbas Ali Mahdi, Sally McClean, Mohammad Kaleem Ahmad, Tabrez Jafar, Sanjay Kumar Singh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. An Exploration of Machine Learning Methods in Human Biomonitoring.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Priyanka ChaurasiaSchool of Computing, Engineering & Intelligent Systems, Ulster University, Londonderry, United Kingdom.
Pratheepan YogarajahSchool of Computing, Engineering & Intelligent Systems, Ulster University, Londonderry, United Kingdom.
Abbas Ali MahdiDepartment of Biochemistry, King George Medical University, Lucknow, India.
Sally McCleanSchool of Computing, Ulster University, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom.
Mohammad Kaleem AhmadDepartment of Biochemistry, Era University, Lucknow, India.
Tabrez JafarDepartment of Biochemistry, Era University, Lucknow, India.
Sanjay Kumar SinghDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Lead toxicity is a well-recognised environmental health issue, with prenatal exposure posing significant risks to infants. One major pathway of exposure to infants is maternal lead transfer during pregnancy. Therefore, accurately characterising maternal lead levels is critical for enabling targeted and personalised healthcare interventions. Current detection methods for lead poisoning are based on laboratory blood tests, which are not feasible for the screening of a wide population due to cost, accessibility, and logistical constraints. To address this limitation, our previous research proposed a novel machine learning (ML)-based model that predicts lead exposure levels in pregnant women using sociodemographic data alone. However, for such predictive models to gain broader acceptance, especially in clinical and public health settings, transparency and interpretability are essential. Methods: Understanding the reasoning behind the predictions of the model is crucial to building trust and facilitating informed decision-making. In this study, we present the first application of an explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) framework to interpret predictions made by our ML-based lead exposure model. Results: Using a dataset of 200 blood samples and 12 sociodemographic features, a Random Forest classifier was trained, achieving an accuracy of 84.52%. Discussion: We applied two widely used XAI methods, SHAP (SHapley additive explanations) and LIME (Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations), to provide insight into how each input feature contributed to the model's predictions.

Indexed as

classificationexplainable AIlead toxicitymachine learningpredictive modelling

Identifiers

PMID40520215
PMCPMC12162601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.