ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Prediction of uterine cavity conception environment using two-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound imaging semantic feature-based machine learning: a case-control study.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundIndependently investigating the association between pregnancy outcomes and the uterine cavity conception environment (UCCE) is challenging. Therefore, this study aimed to employ a range of machine learning algorithms to systematically analyze the semantic features derived from two-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) images that characterize the UCCE.
methodsThis case-control study was conducted at the Women and Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University. Preoperative TVUS findings in patients diagnosed with infertility who subsequently achieved clinical pregnancy within 1 year following hysteroscopic intervention alone were classified as abnormal UCCE (case group), whereas TVUS findings in the uterine cavity of women who successfully achieved clinical pregnancy through follicular monitoring during the same cycle were classified as normal UCCE (control group). We randomly divided 442 participants (cases, n = 244; controls, n = 198) into the training (n = 309) and testing (n = 133) sets. A structured description of the ultrasonic semantic features of UCCE was derived by integrating the images and diagnostic reports. To employ logistic regression (LR), the Boruta algorithm, Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator for univariate feature selection, and five machine learning models-LR, random forest (RF), XGBoost, support vector machines (SVM), and LightGBM-were constructed, followed by a comprehensive evaluation of their predictive performance. Additionally, the Shapley additive explanation technology was employed to elucidate the output results from the best-performing model. A nomogram was created for diagnostic prediction model visualization.
resultsEndometrial thickness, echogenicity, polyps, polyp size, continuity and uterine morphology, and septum type were the semantic features with the highest UCCE predictive value. In the testing set, XGBoost and LightGBM showed the highest (0.982) and lowest (0.902) area under the curve (AUC), respectively. XGBoost, SVM, RF, and MLR attained excellent prediction accuracy (0 < Brier score < 0.1) across the training and testing sets. Decision-curve analysis demonstrated that all models provided substantial net clinical benefits. A significant difference was observed in the nomoscore between the normal and abnormal UCCE groups (p < .001).
conclusionsMachine learning models using semantic features derived from two-dimensional TVUS images enabled accurate preliminary screening for natural conception preparation or before embryo implantation.
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.