ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Risk stratification and prediction of emergency delivery in early-onset preeclampsia using machine learning.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integration of angiogenic pathway-related proteomics and clinical features via ensemble learning for precision risk stratification of early-onset preeclampsia.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for predicting and preventing adverse pregnancy outcomes addressing bias and clinical translation.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Management of acute pyelonephritis in pregnancy in emergency settings: A comparative study of conservative therapy and renal drainage.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEarly-onset preeclampsia (PE) poses significant risks for maternal and fetal outcomes, particularly when emergency delivery is required. This study aimed to develop machine learning models to predict emergency delivery within 48 h of PE diagnosis, facilitating timely clinical interventions.
methodsWe analyzed a retrospective cohort of 648 singleton pregnancies diagnosed with PE at Fujian Maternal and Child Health Hospital from 2014 to 2024, with gestational ages ranging from 28 to 34 weeks. Patients were stratified into emergency delivery (≤ 48 h post-diagnosis, n = 174) and non-emergency groups (n = 474). Feature selection was performed via univariate analysis, collinearity testing, and logistic regression, yielding 16 predictors. Eight machine learning models (logistic regression, naïve Bayes, XGBoost, LightGBM, SVM, GBDT, MLP, elastic net) were trained and evaluated for discriminative power and calibration. SHAP analysis was employed to interpret model predictions.
resultsXGBoost demonstrated superior performance (testing AUROC: 0.908) with excellent calibration, while GBDT achieved high AUROC (0.931) but poorer calibration. SHAP analysis identified CRP, D-dimer, and hypoproteinemia as the most influential predictors.
conclusionsMachine learning models effectively predict emergency delivery in early-onset PE using clinically interpretable features. Integration into obstetric practice may enhance risk stratification, though prospective validation is warranted.
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.