ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025
Antenatal prediction of small for gestational age at birth based on four birthweight standards using machine learning algorithms.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. 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.
- Machine learning to predict adverse perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate antenatal prediction of SGA at birth is essential to improve development and delivery of preventative and therapeutic interventions. This study aimed to assess the performance of machine learning (ML) models to predict SGA at birth among Chinese pregnancies classified according to the Chinese birthweight standard and three international birthweight standards. Methods: We collected multimodal, longitudinal, antenatal surveillance data on 350,135 singleton pregnancies in Wenzhou City, China, between Jan 1, 2014 and Dec 31, 2016. For three pregnancy intervals we developed ML prediction models for newborns classified as SGA using the China, Intergrowth 21st, Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF), and Gestation-related Optimal Weight (GROW) standards. We applied lasso regression to conduct feature selection, and CatBoost, XGBoost, LightBoost, Artificial Neural Networks, Random Forest, Stacked ensemble model, and logistic regression for predictive modeling in training data sets, with validation in testing data sets. Results: Among 22,603 singleton pregnancies with complete data, the rate of SGA using the China standard was 6.1%, compared to 4.3, 6.0, and 9.7% for the Intergrowth 21st, GROW, and FMF standards, respectively. This pattern was maintained in the imputed data set ( Conclusion: There are important differences in the classification of SGA at birth between national and international birthweight standards. Both machine learning models and traditional logistic regression demonstrated comparable predictive performance for SGA identification. These findings hold promise for guiding risk-stratified prenatal care and optimizing resource allocation in clinical settings.
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.