Development and external validation of machine learning algorithms for postnatal gestational age estimation using clinical data and metabolomic markers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate estimates of gestational age (GA) at birth are important for preterm birth surveillance but can be challenging to obtain in low income countries. Our objective was to develop machine learning models to accurately estimate GA shortly after birth using clinical and metabolomic data.We derived three GA estimation models using ELASTIC NET multivariable linear regression using metabolomic markers from heel-prick blood samples and clinical data from a retrospective cohort of newborns from Ontario, Canada. We conducted internal model validation in an independent cohort of Ontario newborns, and external validation in heel prick and cord blood sample data collected from newborns from prospective birth cohorts in Lusaka, Zambia and Matlab, Bangladesh. Model performance was measured by comparing model-derived estimates of GA to reference estimates from early pregnancy ultrasound.Samples were collected from 311 newborns from Zambia and 1176 from Bangladesh. The best-performing model accurately estimated GA within about 6 days of ultrasound estimates in both cohorts when applied to heel prick data (MAE 0.79 weeks (95% CI 0.69, 0.90) for Zambia; 0.81 weeks (0.75, 0.86) for Bangladesh), and within about 7 days when applied to cord blood data (1.02 weeks (0.90, 1.15) for Zambia; 0.95 weeks (0.90, 0.99) for Bangladesh).Algorithms developed in Canada provided accurate estimates of GA when applied to external cohorts from Zambia and Bangladesh. Model performance was superior in heel prick data as compared to cord blood data.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.031 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".