Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42145336›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Development of an advanced maternal health risk detection system using enhanced XGBOOST and blending models.

Hatem Kareem Saleem Altaie, Abdullahi Abdu Ibrahim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. 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

2 authors.

Hatem Kareem Saleem AltaieDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Altinbas University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1481-3577
Abdullahi Abdu IbrahimDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Altinbas University, Istanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Mother's health risks should be identified early so that the outcome of the pregnancy can be enhanced and the complications experienced during pregnancy can be minimized. This paper will design and test a leakage-regulated hybrid machine learning model to predict maternal health risk using the optimized ensemble models. Methods: It used the publicly available UCI Maternal Health Risk dataset (n = 1015). A fixed random seed was used to stratify the dataset to 80% training and 20% independent testing subsets (42). SMOTENN resampling was only done to the training data to avoid data leakage. Internal cross-validation was resorted to as a means of hyperparameter tuning. We came up with the optimized XGBoost, blending, and hybrid stacking models. The performance of a model was measured in terms of accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, ROC-AUC, confusion analysis, and probability mean squared error (Brier score). Results: The hybrid stacking model had a ROC-AUC of 0.911 and general accuracy of 80 percent over the independent test set. The model proved to be very sensitive with high-risk cases (recall = 0.85). The probability mean squared error (Brier score) was 0.07, which is good probability calibration. The hybrid framework proposed performed better in terms of discriminative capability as compared to baseline models (logistic regression, random forest, and SVM). Conclusions: The suggested leakage-sensitive hybrid ensemble framework offers strong and clinically significant working outcomes on maternal health risk forecasting. The results show the significance of effective validation techniques and probabilistic evaluation measures in healthcare machine learning systems.

Indexed as

ensemble, learninggenetic algorithmhybrid modelmaternal diseasepregnancy risk detectionSMOTENNXGBOOST

Identifiers

PMID42145336
PMCPMC13176550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.