ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Machine learning-based risk assessment of neonatal perinatal adverse outcomes of anemia during pregnancy: a modeling study.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGestational anemia significantly elevates the risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, necessitating early predictive tools for targeted intervention. This study aimed to develop and validate a robust machine learning (ML) framework to forecast perinatal complications and facilitate early risk identification.
methodsPerinatal mortality, preterm birth, low birth weight and macrosomia are defined as adverse outcomes. Analyzing a retrospective cohort of 5,710 pregnant women, we identified 22 initial variables using Lasso regression integrated with seven ML-based screening algorithms. Subsequently, eight predictive models were constructed and benchmarked via internal and external validation. Model performance was rigorously evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC), precision‑recall (PR), calibration, and decision curves.
resultsSeven key predictors were identified, including gestational hypertension, obstetric history, and hepatic markers (Albumin, Alanine Aminotransferase, Globulin). The XGBoost model consistently outperformed its counterparts, demonstrating superior discriminative power (area under the curve (AUC) and F1-score) and clinical utility, as confirmed by the DeLong test and Kolmogorov‑Smirnov (KS) statistics. Based on XGBoost probabilities, we established a three-tier risk stratification: low-risk (< 0.28), medium-risk (0.28-0.52), and high-risk (≥ 0.53).
conclusionsOur ML-based framework offers a reliable tool for early risk assessment in gestational anemia, enabling clinicians to implement individualized management strategies through precise risk stratification.
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.