Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41495684›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026

Interpretable clinical decision support systems in high-risk pregnancy: a scoping review of models, methods, and implementation.

Imad El Badisy, Bouchra Assarag, Zakaria Belrhiti

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

3 authors.

Imad El BadisyAI and Data Science Service, Mohammed VI Center for Research and Innovation, Rabat, Morocco. ielbadisy@cm6.ma.
Bouchra AssaragNational School of Public Health, Rabat, Morocco.
Zakaria BelrhitiMohammed VI International School of Public Health Mohammed VI University of Sciences and Health, Casablanca, Morocco.

Funding

International Development Research Centre 110060-001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) powered by machine learning (ML) are increasingly recognized as valuable tools for improving maternal healthcare, particularly in the prevention of high-risk pregnancies. However, their adoption in real-world settings remains limited due to concerns about transparency, reproducibility, and integration into clinical workflows. Interpretable ML methods offer a promising solution by enhancing the usability and trustworthiness of these systems. This scoping review maps interpretable CDSS for maternal high-risk pregnancy prevention and intrapartum management, including both ML and rule-based systems. We examined model characteristics, implementation and validation approaches, and interpretability methods. We searched PubMed and supplemented results with targeted screening in Google Scholar. Included studies reported interpretable outputs and clinical performance. Key data extracted encompassed study design, CDSS type, validation strategies, interpretability techniques, and clinical outcomes. Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Most ML studies used Random Forests or Support Vector Machines. non-ML systems commonly implemented standardized rules, scoring systems with early-warning alerts. Post hoc methods such as SHAP and LIME were frequently used. Reporting of code/data availability was variably documented, which may limited reproducibility. Most evaluations were retrospective, constraining generalizability. Future work should prioritize transparent, prospective, and open science practices, with interpretable outputs aligned to clinical reasoning for successful integration.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalMachine LearningPregnancy, High-RiskFemaleHumansPregnancyReproducibility of ResultsClinical decision support systemHigh-risk pregnancy preventionInterpretable machine learningPredictive modelingRule-based systems

Identifiers

PMID41495684
PMCPMC12870301

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.