ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Development and validation of a machine learning model for prediction of cephalic dystocia.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Establishment and Validation of a Risk Prediction Model for Cephalic Dystocia in Parturients Under Epidural Labor Analgesia.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Correction: Development and validation of a machine learning model for prediction of cephalic dystocia.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly detection of cephalic dystocia is challenging, and current clinical assessment tools are limited. Machine learning offers unique advantages, enabling the generation of predictive models using various types of clinical data. Our model aims to integrate objective ultrasound data with psychological and sociological characteristics and obstetric treatment data to predict the individual probability of cephalic dystocia in pregnant women.
methodsWe collected data from 302 pregnant women who underwent examinations and deliveries at Southern Medical University's Nanfang Hospital from January 2022 to December 2023. We utilized basic patient characteristics, foetal ultrasound parameters, maternal anthropometric data, maternal psychological measurements, and obstetric medical records to train and test the machine learning models. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) algorithm was used to select predictive factors, followed by the development of logistic regression, decision tree, and random forest machine learning models. The precision, accuracy, recall, F1-score, and the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used to evaluate the performance of the models.
resultsAmong the three machine learning models, the LASSO-based logistic regression model demonstrated the best predictive performance, with an AUC value of 0.914. We found that maternal ischial spine diameter, fetal head circumference-to-maternal height ratio, artificial rupture of membranes, childbirth self-efficacy, and other 11 variables were predictive factors for cephalic dystocia.
conclusionsThis study applied a LASSO-based logistic regression prediction model for cephalic dystocia. The model demonstrated good predictive performance and can assist in selecting the appropriate mode of delivery.
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.