Artificial Neural Network Analysis of Spontaneous Preterm Labor and Birth and Its Major Determinants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little research based on the artificial neural network (ANN) is done on preterm birth (spontaneous preterm labor and birth) and its major determinants. This study uses an ANN for analyzing preterm birth and its major determinants. METHODS: Data came from Anam Hospital in Seoul, Korea, with 596 obstetric patients during March 27, 2014 - August 21, 2018. Six machine learning methods were applied and compared for the prediction of preterm birth. Variable importance, the effect of a variable on model performance, was used for identifying major determinants of preterm birth. Analysis was done in December, 2018. RESULTS: The accuracy of the ANN (0.9115) was similar with those of logistic regression and the random forest (0.9180 and 0.8918, respectively). Based on variable importance from the ANN, major determinants of preterm birth are body mass index (0.0164), hypertension (0.0131) and diabetes mellitus (0.0099) as well as prior cone biopsy (0.0099), prior placenta previa (0.0099), parity (0.0033), cervical length (0.0001), age (0.0001), prior preterm birth (0.0001) and myomas & adenomyosis (0.0001). CONCLUSION: For preventing preterm birth, preventive measures for hypertension and diabetes mellitus are required alongside the promotion of cervical-length screening with different guidelines across the scope/type of prior conization.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".