MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389283805 · doi:10.2196/52059

Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Maternal Hemorrhage and Transfusion: Model Development Study

2023· article· en· W4389283805 on OpenAlex
Homa K. Ahmadzia, Alexa Dzienny, Mike Bopf, Jaclyn M. Phillips, Jerome J. Federspiel, Richard Amdur, Madeline Murguia Rice, Laritza Rodriguez

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and fetal healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. National Library of MedicineNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineReceiver operating characteristicLogistic regressionBlood transfusionNomogramObstetricsArea under the curvePredictive modellingMachine learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Current postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) risk stratification is based on traditional statistical models or expert opinion. Machine learning could optimize PPH prediction by allowing for more complex modeling. OBJECTIVE: We sought to improve PPH prediction and compare machine learning and traditional statistical methods. METHODS: We developed models using the Consortium for Safe Labor data set (2002-2008) from 12 US hospitals. The primary outcome was a transfusion of blood products or PPH (estimated blood loss of ≥1000 mL). The secondary outcome was a transfusion of any blood product. Fifty antepartum and intrapartum characteristics and hospital characteristics were included. Logistic regression, support vector machines, multilayer perceptron, random forest, and gradient boosting (GB) were used to generate prediction models. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) and area under the precision/recall curve (PR-AUC) were used to compare performance. RESULTS: Among 228,438 births, 5760 (3.1%) women had a postpartum hemorrhage, 5170 (2.8%) had a transfusion, and 10,344 (5.6%) met the criteria for the transfusion-PPH composite. Models predicting the transfusion-PPH composite using antepartum and intrapartum features had the best positive predictive values, with the GB machine learning model performing best overall (ROC-AUC=0.833, 95% CI 0.828-0.838; PR-AUC=0.210, 95% CI 0.201-0.220). The most predictive features in the GB model predicting the transfusion-PPH composite were the mode of delivery, oxytocin incremental dose for labor (mU/minute), intrapartum tocolytic use, presence of anesthesia nurse, and hospital type. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning offers higher discriminability than logistic regression in predicting PPH. The Consortium for Safe Labor data set may not be optimal for analyzing risk due to strong subgroup effects, which decreases accuracy and limits generalizability.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it