Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41480586›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025

A machine learning model for assessing fetal health during pregnancy.

Arshad Kalathil Ashik, Robert Gutierrez, Fidha Ashraf, Tricia Adjei, Sohini Patel, Isabella Abati, Zhenhua Yu, Saksham Dhawan, Jia Li, Khondaker A Mamun and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Arshad Kalathil AshikDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Robert GutierrezDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Fidha AshrafDepartment of Psychiatry, Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, United Kingdom.
Tricia AdjeiDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Sohini PatelInstitute of Reproductive Developmental Biology, Department of Metabolism Digestion and Reproduction, Hammersmith Campus, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Isabella AbatiInstitute of Reproductive Developmental Biology, Department of Metabolism Digestion and Reproduction, Hammersmith Campus, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Zhenhua YuDepartment of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Saksham DhawanDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Jia LiDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Khondaker A MamunDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, United International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Thomas ReddyhoffDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Daniele DiniDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Christoph LeesInstitute of Reproductive Developmental Biology, Department of Metabolism Digestion and Reproduction, Hammersmith Campus, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Ravi VaidyanathanDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a global imperative to end stillbirths, particularly in low middle income countries (LMICs), which suffer from disproportionate incidence. Sudden changes in fetal movement (FM) patterns often precede a crisis, which, if flagged, can trigger life-saving intervention. Existing means of FM tracking, however, are based on outdated understanding which have remained unchanged for decades. The current standard for monitoring FM out-of-clinic remains maternal perception, which suffers from subjectivity and has little impact in reducing stillbirth or poor perinatal outcomes. Ultrasound can trace FM and trigger intervention but is administered sporadically over the course of pregnancy and demands clinician expertise and resources; frequent use is not feasible, particularly in LMICs. Wearable FM monitors have been proposed for FM empirical movement monitoring, however, clinical impact remains negligible due to homogeneous sensing modalities and lack of clinical validation. Herein, a multimodal vibrational-acoustic sensor array consisting of piezoelectric and acoustic sensing modalities is validated for use in a wearable FM. 25 pregnant participants were recruited to record vibrational-acoustic data from the array in parallel with ultrasound scanning. Categorised fetal movements were recorded by a clinician, and several machine learning models were investigated to validate the sensors to track FM. An ensemble RUSBoost model combined with concatenated sensor data inputs was implemented, yielding FM prediction with precision and recall of 0.44 and 0.61, demonstrating the feasibility of the vibroacoustic sensor array to monitor FM. Inexpensive off-the-shelf sensors comprising the array provide a basis for the development of a fully wearable FM monitor that can be used in LMICs.

Indexed as

acoustic sensing modalitiesfetal movementFMpiezoelectricrusboost modelvibrational-acoustic sensor arrayvibroacoustic sensor array

Identifiers

PMID41480586
PMCPMC12754730

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.