ArticlePrenatal diagnosis2026
The Prediction of Pre-Eclampsia Using Low Fetal Fraction in a Machine Learning Model.
Article in Prenatal diagnosis, 2026. 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.
- The Prediction of Pre-Eclampsia Using Low Fetal Fraction in a Machine Learning Model.Prenatal diagnosis · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the association between low fetal fraction (FF) in non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and pregnancy complications or adverse pregnancy outcomes.
methodsSixty-four pregnant women undergoing NIPT at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University between 13 June 2019 and 6 January 2023 had an initial NIPT failure due to low FF. Three cases were lost to follow-up, leaving 61 cases in the failure group (Group A). Group A was subdivided into 37 cases with a valid result after redraw (Group A1) and 24 cases remaining unsuccessful after redraw (Group A2). Concurrently, 119 pregnancies with successful NIPT (normal FF, no fetal chromosomal abnormalities) were randomly selected as controls (Group C). Logistic regression and XGBoost models were established, and their area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity were calculated and compared.
resultsThe incidence of pre-eclampsia was significantly higher in Group A than in Group C (p < 0.05). No significant difference in the incidence of pre-eclampsia was found between Groups A1 and A2. A logistic regression model incorporating FF predicted pre-eclampsia with an AUC of 0.750 (95% CI: 0.639-0.860), sensitivity of 0.875, and specificity of 0.727. An XGBoost model incorporating 10 factors (FF, age, weight, BMI, gestational age, systolic/diastolic blood pressure at sampling, ART history, delivery history, heparin use history) demonstrated superior performance (AUC = 0.956, 95% CI: 0.868-1.000; accuracy = 0.944). The top three important factors were systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and FF.
conclusionsLow FF in NIPT may indicate an increased risk of pre-eclampsia. Regardless of the success of redraw, pregnancies with initial NIPT failure due to low FF warrant vigilance for pre-eclampsia development. The XGBoost machine learning model demonstrates good efficacy for predicting pre-eclampsia and has potential as an adjunctive prenatal screening tool for early diagnosis.
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.