ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2025
Machine Learning-Driven Intrapartum Fever Prediction: A Comprehensive Large Retrospective Cohort Study Integrating Inflammatory and Obstetric Markers.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop and validate a machine learning-driven predictive model for intrapartum fever in parturients receiving neuraxial labor analgesia, integrating comprehensive clinical and hematological markers. Methods: Among 15,760 parturients (2022-2024), 11,032 (70%) were allocated to the training cohort (834 [7.6%] febrile cases) and 4728 (30%) to the testing cohort (364 [7.7%] febrile cases). A three-stage variable screening process was applied, including Pearson correlation analysis (|r| > 0.15), LASSO regression with 10-fold cross-validation, and SHAP value analysis (top 75% importance). Seven machine learning algorithms, namely Logistic Regression (LR), Decision Tree (DT), Random Forest (RF), eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), and Elastic Net (ENET), were evaluated via accuracy, ROC AUC, and cost-benefit analysis. Results: Key predictors were neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR, SHAP=0.27), white blood cell count (WBC, SHAP=0.22), and primiparity (SHAP=0.18), with fever cases showing elevated NLR (7.71 vs 4.60, P<0.001) and vaginal exams (3.24 vs 2.29, P<0.001). Notably, the Random Forest (RF) model achieved a high test AUC of 0.94 but a reduced specificity of 0.57, which may increase false-positive risks (eg, unnecessary antimicrobial use). In contrast, Logistic Regression (LR) and Elastic Net (ENET) showed consistent generalizability (test AUC=0.87) with better specificity (0.69), making them more suitable for broad clinical application. Cost-benefit analysis identified a 3:2 ratio as optimal, with RF maintaining sensitivity across extreme thresholds. Conclusion: This study establishes a robust model integrating inflammatory and obstetric parameters, with RF as the top performer for risk stratification. The framework enables targeted intervention, addressing a critical gap in intrapartum fever management. Future directions include prospective validation and real-time biomarker integration.
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.