ArticleJournal of imaging2026
Artificial Intelligence Dystocia Algorithm (AIDA) for Risk Stratification of Occiput Posterior Fetal Head Position.
Article in Journal of imaging, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The occiput posterior (OP) fetal head position is the most common malposition during labor and is associated with prolonged labor, operative delivery, and cesarean section. Conventional assessment often relies on digital examination, and the clinical significance of OP may lie along a spectrum rather than as a binary diagnosis. The Artificial Intelligence Dystocia Algorithm (AIDA) integrates four objective intrapartum ultrasound parameters (Angle of Progression [AoP], Head-Symphysis Distance [HSD], Midline Angle [MLA], and Asynclitism Degree [AD]) into a five-class ordinal classification (Classes 0-4). This investigation is a focused secondary subgroup analysis of 79 OP cases drawn from a single-cohort dataset of 135 nulliparous women with prolonged second-stage labor originally collected for the development of the AIDA. Only Branch 1 of the AIDA (the deterministic threshold-based classification, with cut-offs originally derived via Decision Tree on the parent cohort, N = 135) was applied; Branch 2 (the case-level machine-learning predictors) was not used, and no predictive model was trained or validated in this study. Cesarean delivery rates rose monotonically across AIDA classes, from no cesareans in Class 0 to all cases delivering by cesarean in Class 4, with a clear gradient across intermediate classes; full numerical results, confidence intervals, and effect sizes are reported in the Results section. Because the AIDA thresholds were derived from the same parent cohort, the analysis is best interpreted as a within-cohort subgroup evaluation rather than as independent validation. The observed class-graded outcome distribution is consistent with the hypothesis that in OP labors, the AIDA class assignment itself may carry clinically relevant information on the risk of intrapartum cesarean delivery; this remains hypothesis generating, and confirmation in independent prospective cohorts is required before AIDA-class assignment can be regarded as an established risk-stratification descriptor in OP labors.
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.