ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2026
Evaluating and Refining Claims-Based Algorithms for Pregnancy Outcomes and Gestational Age Estimation in Korea.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA recently developed claims-based algorithm, originally designed using data from pregnancies with systemic lupus erythematosus, may enhance the identification of pregnancy episodes in Korean observational research. However, its applicability for estimating gestational age (GA) has not yet been validated in the general pregnant population. This study aimed to evaluate and refine the algorithm's performance.
methodsWe utilized nationwide claims data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service between February 27, 2021, and December 31, 2022, to identify pregnancy episodes, including deliveries, stillbirths (SBs), and abortive outcomes (ABs). GA for each episode was estimated using both the original and modified algorithms, which prioritized second-to-third trimester target scan (TS) codes and first-trimester TS codes, respectively. Identified episodes with GA outside clinically plausible ranges for each pregnancy outcome were either reclassified into different outcomes or excluded. Algorithm performance was evaluated based on the following three criteria: first, the agreement between the estimated GA and the specified GA range in delivery episodes with a preterm birth (PB) code; second, comparison of estimated preterm birth (ePB) rates with national statistics reported by the Korean Statistical Information Service (KOSIS); third, sensitivity analysis of ultrasound code prioritization on the ePB rate.
resultsAmong 581,740 pregnancy episodes, 456,157 were deliveries, 3,050 were SB, and 122,533 were AB. Deliveries with a GA of less than 37 weeks were classified as ePB, with rates of 39.7% in the original algorithm and 11.9% in the modified algorithm. In delivery episodes with PB codes that included specified GA ranges, the modified algorithm demonstrated higher agreement with the specified GA compared to the original algorithm (96.4% vs. 75.2%). The ePB rate estimated by the modified algorithm was also more consistent with the 9.4% reported by KOSIS, compared to the original algorithm (12.0% vs. 39.8%).
conclusionThe modified algorithm, which prioritized first-trimester TS codes, improved the accuracy of GA estimation and reduced the underestimation observed in the original algorithm.
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.