ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Machine learning-based fetal health prediction and development of smart web application.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Fetal health monitoring is critical for early identification of pregnancy-related risks. Manual interpretation of cardiotocography (CTG) signals is subjective and variable among healthcare professionals. Methods: A machine learning-based framework was developed to classify fetal health into Normal, Suspect, and Pathological categories using CTG-derived clinical features. The dataset was preprocessed through duplicate removal, normalization, class balancing using SMOTEENN, multicollinearity analysis via VIF, and Kruskal-Wallis statistical feature selection. Eleven machine learning and neural network models were trained and compared, including Logistic Regression, K-Nearest Neighbors, SVM, Decision Tree, Random Forest, Gradient Boosting, AdaBoost, XGBoost, LightGBM, Multi-Layer Perceptron, and Deep Neural Network. Results: LightGBM achieved the best overall performance with 96.03% accuracy, 91.99% balanced accuracy, 93.05% macro F1-score, 99.02% ROC-AUC, 88.91% Cohen's Kappa, and 89.01% MCC. SHAP-based explainability identified abnormal short-term variability and fetal heart rate accelerations as the most important features. Discussion: The best-performing LightGBM model was integrated into a Streamlit-based web application for real-time fetal health prediction, demonstrating its potential as a clinical decision-support tool.
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.