ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Prediction model for intrapartum labor analgesia efficacy based on preoperative multidimensional indicators.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Effective labor analgesia is paramount for maternal well-being and positive birth experiences. However, the efficacy of intrapartum labor analgesia exhibits considerable inter-individual variability. Identifying reliable preoperative predictors for labor analgesia efficacy is crucial for optimizing pain management strategies and enhancing patient outcomes. This study aimed to develop and validate a prediction model for intrapartum labor analgesia efficacy utilizing preoperative multidimensional indicators. Methods: This retrospective study enrolled 137 parturients who received labor analgesia. Preoperative multidimensional indicators, encompassing demographic data, clinical characteristics, and psychological assessments, were systematically collected. Logistic Regression (LR), Naive Bayes (NB), Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) models were developed and comparatively analyzed. Feature selection was conducted using LASSO regression. Model performance was rigorously evaluated using metrics such as Area Under the Curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis. Results: Initial logistic regression analysis revealed several significant preoperative predictors, including pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH), binary ultrasound cervical length, and continuous ultrasound cervical length. LASSO regression further refined the feature set, illustrating the dynamic changes in coefficients across varying lambda values. Among the developed models, the XGB model consistently demonstrated superior discriminative ability, achieving an AUC of 0.875 (95% CI: 0.802 to 0.948) in the training set and 0.759 (95% CI: 0.606 to 0.912) in the validation set, thereby indicating robust performance. Calibration curves provided insights into the agreement between predicted and observed probabilities across models. Decision curve analysis elucidated the clinical utility of these models, underscoring the potential net benefit of employing these predictive tools. Conclusion: This study successfully developed and validated a prediction model for intrapartum labor analgesia efficacy grounded in preoperative multidimensional indicators. The XGB model exhibited promising performance, suggesting its potential for clinical application in identifying parturients who could benefit from individualized pain management strategies. Further prospective validation in diverse cohorts is warranted to confirm these findings and facilitate clinical implementation.
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.