ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Prediction of female reproductive tract infections risk among college-going young adult women in Delhi using explainable artificial intelligence.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Reproductive tract infections (RTIs) and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) pose a substantial economic burden and public health concern in developing countries such as India, where inadequate early detection and prevention strategies often lead to increased morbidity, mortality, stigma, cancer and adverse reproductive health outcomes in both men and women. Methods: The present cross-sectional study employed machine-learning models to predict the risk of RTI/STI among young women in Delhi, India, by analysing self-reported symptoms along with demographic, reproductive health, lifestyle, and hygiene-related factors. The data were analysed using multiple machine learning algorithms, including decision trees, random forest, k-nearest neighbors (KNN), stochastic gradient descent (SGD), and XGBoost. Prior to analysis, the data was preprocessed through different steps including missing-value imputation, outlier removal using the interquartile range (IQR) method, and the synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) to address class imbalance. Results: A comparative analysis of model performance revealed that the XGBoost algorithm achieved the highest accuracy (89.1%) and the greatest area under receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC-AUC = 0.935), with random forest performing strongly as the second-best model (accuracy = 87.6%, ROC-AUC = 0.921), demonstrating its strong ability to capture non-linear relationships among RTI risk factors. SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) analysis identified family medical history, personal RTI history, and menstrual cycle characteristics as the most influential predictors. Discussion: The findings underscore the potential of machine learning-driven predictive models in RTI risk stratification, screening support, and hypothesis generation.
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.