ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2025
Machine learning predictive system to predict the risk of developing pre-eclampsia.
Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence for the Prediction of Preeclampsia: Current Evidence, Comparison with Conventional Screening Models, and Future Perspectives.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Obstetrics: Current Trends and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Machine learning models for predicting postpartum convulsions using clinical indicators from PMA Ethiopia data.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Comparison of Machine Learning Models and the FMF Competing-Risks Algorithm for First-Trimester Preeclampsia Screening in a Romanian Cohort.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Machine learning based prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus using early pregnancy biomarkers and clinical data.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Article
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
objectivesTo develop a machine learning (ML)-based predictive model for assessing the risk of pre-eclampsia using routinely collected clinical data.
methodsWe retrospectively analysed data from 2444 pregnant women who delivered at Chi Mei Medical Center between 2015 and 2019, excluding patients under 20 years old. Pre-eclampsia was defined as blood pressure >140/90 mm Hg with proteinuria. Key features included gestational age, body weight, blood pressure and medical history. Five ML models were trained-logistic regression, random forest, light gradient boosting machine, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) and multilayer perceptron-using a 70/30 train-validation split. Synthetic minority oversampling technique was applied to address class imbalance. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis was used for feature importance.
resultsAmong the five models, XGBoost showed the best performance with the highest accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.921. SHAP analysis identified diastolic blood pressure, systolic blood pressure and urine glucose as top predictors. DISCUSSION: Our findings demonstrate that ML, particularly XGBoost, can effectively predict the risk of pre-eclampsia using standard clinical data. This approach avoids the need for expensive tests while maintaining high accuracy.
conclusionThe XGBoost model offers a cost-effective and accurate method for pre-eclampsia risk prediction, enabling real-time assessment and supporting early intervention. Future studies will focus on larger data sets and clinical integration.
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.