ArticleReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2025
Development and Validation of An Interpretable Machine Learning-Based Prediction Model of Postpartum Hemorrhage in Placenta Previa Following Cesarean Section: A Multicenter Study.
Article in Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 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.
- Artificial intelligence for postpartum hemorrhage: a systematic review.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The objective of this study is to predict the occurrence of postpartum hemorrhage in women with placenta previa based on machine learning. This retrospective study enrolled 845 singleton pregnant patients with placenta previa from two hospitals. They were allocated into a training cohort (n = 403), a testing cohort (n = 174), and the external validation cohort (n = 268). Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were employed to select clinical variables (p < 0.05), which were subsequently utilized to develop 11 machine learning prediction models. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), decision curve analysis (DCA), accuracy (ACC), sensitivity (SEN), and specificity (SPE) were used to evaluate the performance of the models. Besides, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) was used to interpret the role and effectiveness of variables in the predictive model. Three machine learning models with the best predictive performance were combined into a Prediction Ensemble Classifier through voting. The Gradient Boosting Machine demonstrated the best predictive performance. In the validation cohort, AUC of the Gradient Boosting Machine model is 0.810(95% CI 0.754-0.865), ACC was 0.765(95% CI 0.716-0.813), SEN was 0.613(95% CI 0.513-0.723), while these values of the Prediction Ensemble Classifier were 0.813(0.756-0.871), 0.806(0.757-0.854), and 0.480(0.375-0.597), respectively. The importance of SHAP variables in the model, ranked from high to low, is as follows: d-dimer, ultrasound diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum, neutrophils, prothrombin time, and platelets. The Gradient Boosting Machine model demonstrated excellent performance in predicting postpartum hemorrhage in cases of placenta previa. Furthermore, SHAP analysis enabled interpretation of the variables in the model.
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.