ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Predictive model of sleep disorders in pregnant women using machine learning and SHAP analysis.
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. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSleep disorders are common among pregnant women and can adversely affect maternal and infant health. Traditional statistical methods have limitations in predicting these disorders, highlighting the need for advanced machine learning (ML) approaches. This study aimed to develop a reliable ML model for early prediction of pregnancy-related sleep disorders.
methodsData from 1,681 pregnant women in western China were analyzed. Logistic regression and LASSO regression identified key predictors, with 10 variables selected for Model training. Eight ML algorithms were evaluated using 5-fold cross-validation. SHAP analysis interpreted the model's decisions.
resultsTen predictors were identified: age, standardized gestational weight gain, gestational weeks, severity of morning sickness, pregnancy intention, pre-pregnancy health, underlying diseases, anxiety, depression, and the combined effect of anxiety and depression. LightGBM achieved the highest AUC (0.718) in the test set, with accuracy of 0.670 and specificity of 0.764. SHAP analysis revealed depression as the strongest predictor (mean |SHAP|=0.26), followed by gestational weeks and Std. GWG.
conclusionThe interpretable and accurate LightGBM model, using clinically feasible variables, is a practical tool for early identification of pregnant women at high risk of sleep disorders. It enables targeted interventions to mitigate sleep - related adverse outcomes, thus improving maternal and infant health.
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.