ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Explainable machine learning model to predict 6-month exclusive breastfeeding: a prospective cohort study in Jiangsu, China.
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 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of Digital Health Interventions on Breastfeeding Rates, Self-Efficacy, and Knowledge: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of remote breastfeeding guidance on breastfeeding rates and neonatal health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExclusive breastfeeding (EBF) during the first 6 months is globally recommended for optimal maternal and child health. Nevertheless, adherence to this recommendation remains suboptimal in China. This study aimed to identify predictors of 6-month EBF among mothers in Jiangsu Province by developing an explainable machine learning (ML) model within a prospective cohort design.
methodsBetween August 2022 and March 2023, postpartum women were recruited through multistage random sampling across hospitals of different levels. Data were collected via structured discharge interviews and three follow-up calls using validated instruments. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression was applied for feature selection. Four ML algorithms, including Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Random Forest, Decision Tree, and Logistic Regression, were compared using tenfold cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) in the training set. The best-performing algorithm was then retrained on the full training set and evaluated in an independent validation set. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) was applied to enhance interpretability.
resultsA total of 374 mothers completed follow-ups. Fewer than half sustained EBF for 2 months, about one-third for 4 months, and only 12.3% for 6 months. XGBoost showed the highest cross-validated performance (mean AUC = 0.75). After retraining, the XGBoost model achieved an AUC of 0.999 in the full training set and 0.853 in the validation set. SHAP analysis identified the most influential predictors in the following order: breastfeeding (BF) intention, subjective norm, perceived control, BF attitude, BF knowledge, maternal education, and exposure to BF education.
conclusionsSustaining EBF for 6 months remains challenging. The XGBoost model, interpreted using SHAP, demonstrated acceptable internal performance. It also yielded exploratory yet informative insights into factors influencing 6-month EBF. These findings generate preliminary evidence that may inform locally relevant EBF support efforts and contribute to the growing body of data-driven EBF studies. External validation is required before considering broader applicability.
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.