ArticleFrontiers in global women's health2026
Factors associated with prior pregnancy loss among multigravid women: a retrospective machine learning analysis from an African population cohort.
Article in Frontiers in global women's health, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Pregnancy loss remains a significant challenge in obstetric care, with traditional risk assessment methods, such as clinical history and radiological investigations, often lacking precision in predicting outcomes. This study applied machine learning (ML) to develop a robust model for identifying factors associated with pregnancy loss, with the goal of highlighting candidate predictors for further investigation and validation in future studies in African populations. Methods: The study utilized sociodemographic, clinical and laboratory variables collected at baseline from an ongoing cohort study titled "Future maternal cardiovascular health after pre-eclampsia in an indigenous African population". A total of 1,017 pregnant women attending Mulago National Referral Hospital in Kampala, Uganda were enrolled between 2019 and 2021. However, the outcome question was not administered to women on their first pregnancy, limiting the modeling population to multigravid women ( Results: Random Forest achieved the highest discrimination (MCC 0.36, 95% CI 0.25-0.47; ROC-AUC 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.83), followed closely by CatBoost (MCC 0.35, 95% CI 0.18-0.46; ROC-AUC 0.71, 95% CI 0.61-0.77); confidence intervals for the two ensemble models overlapped substantially. Both outperformed logistic regression (MCC 0.22, 95% CI 0.08-0.35). Across both tree-based models and both SHAP and permutation-based importance methods, the number of pregnancies carried past seven months, maternal age, and maternal education ranked as the leading correlates. Subgroup analysis showed broadly consistent discrimination across reliable age, education, and maternal tribe. Conclusion: A few sociodemographic and obstetric history factors are statistically associated with a documented history of pregnancy loss among multigravid women in this Ugandan cohort. Because the outcome reflects reproductive history rather than the result of an observed pregnancy, these findings should be read as hypothesis-generating groundwork for future prospective, externally validated risk-prediction research rather than as a clinical tool for identifying women at risk of a future miscarriage.
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.