Evidence mapPaperPMID 40986161Full record

ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025

Development and validation of a machine learning-based predictive model for live birth outcomes following fresh embryo transfer in patients with endometriosis.

Suqin Zhu, Huiling Xu, Rongshan Li, Xiaojing Chen, Wenwen Jiang, Beihong Zheng, Yan Sun

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Suqin Zhu *Center of Reproductive Medicine, Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, No. 18 Daoshan Road, Fuzhou, 350001, China.
Huiling Xu *Center of Reproductive Medicine, Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, No. 18 Daoshan Road, Fuzhou, 350001, China.
Rongshan Li *Center of Reproductive Medicine, Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, No. 18 Daoshan Road, Fuzhou, 350001, China.
Xiaojing ChenCenter of Reproductive Medicine, Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, No. 18 Daoshan Road, Fuzhou, 350001, China.
Wenwen JiangCenter of Reproductive Medicine, Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, No. 18 Daoshan Road, Fuzhou, 350001, China.
Beihong ZhengCenter of Reproductive Medicine, Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, No. 18 Daoshan Road, Fuzhou, 350001, China. zhengbeihong2010@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7475-2569
Yan SunCenter of Reproductive Medicine, Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, No. 18 Daoshan Road, Fuzhou, 350001, China. sunyan@fjsfy.com.

Funding

the Fujian provincial health technology project 2022GGA035the Fujian Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China 2023J011221the Fujian Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China 2023J011229the Joint Funds for the innovation of science and Technology, Fujian province 2024Y9572the Key Project on Science and Technology Program of Fujian Health Commission 2021ZD01002the major Scientific Research Program for Young and Middle-aged Health Professionals of Fujian Province 2022ZQNZD010the National Key Research and Development Program of China 2024YFC2706703
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aims to develop a machine learning-based predictive model for patients with endometriosis, with the goal of precisely identifying key factors and reliable predictive markers that influence live birth outcomes following fresh embryo transfer. Through systematic evaluation of multiple algorithms, efforts will be made to identify the optimal model for elucidating high-risk factors affecting live birth, thereby providing a basis for formulating targeted interventions to enhance the live birth rate in this population undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI).

methodsThis study adopted a retrospective cohort design and included 1836 patients with endometriosis who underwent fresh embryo transfer via in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) at Fujian Provincial Maternity and Children's Hospital between 2018 and 2023. Participants were randomly allocated to either the training set or the validation set, with a 70:30 split (1285 in the training set and 551 in the validation set), making this an internal validation study. Independent variables were screened using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and recursive feature elimination (RFE) algorithms. For eight machine learning models, namely decision tree (DT), K-nearest neighbor (KNN), logistic regression (LR), light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM), naive Bayes model (NBM), random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), we determined the optimal hyperparameter configurations using the grid search strategy. All models were trained, and their performances were evaluated through receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, decision curve analysis (DCA), and Brier score (BS). The results showed that the XGBoost model exhibited the best predictive performance and was thus selected as the final modeling solution. In addition, the feature importance analysis combined with the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) value dependency plots systematically revealed the relative contributions and influence mechanisms of key features on the model predictions.

resultsLasso and RFE analyses identified eight predictive variables for model development. The AUC values for DT, KNN, LightGBM, LR, naive Bayes, RF, SVM, and XGBoost in the training set were 0.784, 0.987, 0.841, 0.800, 0.803, 0.988, 0.799, and 0.920, while those in the test set were 0.765, 0.748, 0.801, 0.805, 0.810, 0.820, 0.807, and 0.852, respectively. XGBoost demonstrated the highest predictive performance among all models. SHAP analysis identified anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH), female age, antral follicle count (AFC), infertility duration, GnRH agonist protocol, revised American Fertility Society (rAFS) stage, normal fertilization number, and number of transferred embryos as key predictors for live birth following fresh embryo transfer in patients with endometriosis.

conclusionThis study developed a machine learning-based predictive model for live birth following fresh embryo transfer in patients with endometriosis and systematically evaluated the comparative performance of multiple algorithms. The XGBoost model demonstrated superior overall performance, facilitating timely and precise identification of high-risk factors influencing live birth outcomes. These findings can inform targeted interventions to improve pregnancy outcomes in women with endometriosis.

Indexed as

Embryo TransferEndometriosisLive BirthMachine LearningAdultAlgorithmsFemaleFertilization in VitroHumansPregnancyPregnancy RateRetrospective StudiesSperm Injections, IntracytoplasmicEndometriosisFresh embryo transferIn vitro fertilization-embryo transferLive birthMachine learning

Identifiers

PMID40986161
PMCPMC12640418

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.