ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2025
Predicting stillbirth and identifying key maternal risk factors using machine learning.
Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Machine learning to predict adverse perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStillbirth remains a major public health concern, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. Identifying maternal and obstetric determinants is essential for prevention and targeted interventions. Logistic regression offers a baseline predictive model, while machine learning (ML) methods, such as Random Forest (RF) and Extreme Gradient Boosting, can improve predictive accuracy and highlight key risk factors through feature importance. This study aimed to predict stillbirth and identify influential maternal and obstetric predictors among pregnant women in Ethiopia using ML models.
methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using maternal and obstetric records from Bishoftu General Hospital, Ethiopia. Predictors included maternal age, weight, gravidity, gestational age at admission and delivery, history of pre-eclampsia, antenatal care visits, pregnancy complications, multiplicity, previous abortion and mode of delivery. Data were split into training (70%) and testing (30%) sets. RF, Gradient Boosting Machines, Support Vector Machines and logistic regression were applied. Model performance was evaluated using accuracy, precision, recall, balanced accuracy and receiver operating characteristic-area under the curve (ROC-AUC). Feature importance and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) supported interpretability.
resultsAmong 549 pregnancies, 17 stillbirths occurred. RF outperformed other models, achieving 92% accuracy, 0.95 ROC-AUC and 0.94 balanced accuracy. Maternal age was the strongest predictor, followed by mode of labour, maternal weight, gravidity and delivery mode. Pregnancy complications and antenatal care visits showed moderate importance, while history of pre-eclampsia, previous abortion and multiplicity contributed minimally. SHAP analysis confirmed these findings and explained variable-specific effects on risk.
conclusionsMaternal age emerged as the dominant determinant of stillbirth, with labour and delivery factors and maternal characteristics also contributing. ML models, particularly RF, effectively identified high-risk pregnancies and provided interpretable predictions through SHAP analysis. These findings underscore the potential of ML to support targeted prenatal care and reduce stillbirth risk in low-resource settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.