ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Development of a predictive model for high-risk infertility based on TCM constitution and syndrome: a secondary analysis.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the informational contribution of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) variables to high-risk infertility stratification and to develop predictive models integrating TCM and Western medical factors. Methods: Data from 409 women with infertility were analyzed. High-risk infertility was defined as infertility duration >3 years or the presence of ≥2 documented infertility-related causes. Demographic, reproductive, menstrual, and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) constitution and syndrome variables were collected. Three predictive models- a TCM model (Model 1), a modern medicine model (Model 2), and an integrated model (Model 3)-were developed using independent candidate variable sets for each model. Variable selection was performed separately for each model using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) logistic regression with 10-fold cross-validation. Multivariable logistic regression models were then fitted based on the selected predictors. Model performance was assessed using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Internal validation and optimism correction were conducted using bootstrap resampling with an out-of-bag strategy. Results: Among the participants, 163 women (39.9%) were classified as high-risk infertility. The high-risk group was older and differed significantly in reproductive history and clinical characteristics. The Model 3 showed a slight improvement in apparent discrimination compared with the Model 2 [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.790 vs. 0.771]. However, after optimism correction, the Model 2 demonstrated more robust discrimination, calibration, and overall predictive accuracy. The Model 3 exhibited miscalibration after correction, indicating the need for further shrinkage and recalibration. The Model 1 showed limited discriminative ability (AUC = 0.606). Conclusion: After internal validation, the modern medicine model showed the most stable predictive performance. The integrative model mainly contributed to exploring the potential informational value of TCM variables in infertility risk stratification rather than improving predictive accuracy. These findings provide methodological support for infertility risk assessment within an integrative Chinese and Western medicine framework.
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.