Lambert G, Brichant JF, Hartstein G, Bonhomme V, Dewandre PY. Preeclampsia: an update. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2014;65:137–49.

CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Visintin C, Mugglestone MA, Almerie MQ, Nherera LM, James D, Walkinshaw S. Management of hypertensive disorders during pregnancy: summary of NICE guidance. BMJ. 2010;341: c2207.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Hypertension G. Gestational hypertension and preeclampsia: ACOG Practice Bulletin Summary, Number 222. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;135:1492–5.

Article  Google Scholar 

Karrar SA, Hong PL. Preeclampsia. InStatPearls [Internet] 2023 Feb 13. StatPearls Publishing.

Poon LC, Shennan A, Hyett JA, Kapur A, Hadar E, Divakar H, et al. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) initiative on pre-eclampsia: a pragmatic guide for first-trimester screening and prevention. Int J Gynaecol Obstet Off organ Int Fed Gynaecol Obstet. 2019;145(Suppl):1–33.

Article  Google Scholar 

Rolnik DL, Wright D, Poon LC, O’Gorman N, Syngelaki A, de Paco MC, et al. Aspirin versus placebo in pregnancies at high risk for preterm preeclampsia. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:613–22.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Henderson JT, Whitlock EP, O’Connor E, Senger CA, Thompson JH, Rowland MG. Low-dose aspirin for prevention of morbidity and mortality from preeclampsia: a systematic evidence review for the U.S. preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:695–703.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Van Doorn R, Mukhtarova N, Flyke IP, Lasarev M, Kim K, Hennekens CH, et al. Dose of aspirin to prevent preterm preeclampsia in women with moderate or high-risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2021;16: e0247782.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Rolnik DL, Nicolaides KH, Poon LC. Prevention of preeclampsia with aspirin. Am J Obstet Gynecol [Internet]. 2022;226:S1108-19. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.08.045.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Steyerberg EW. Clinical models prediction a practical approach to development, validation, and updating. 2019.

Duckitt K, Harrington D. Risk factors for pre-eclampsia at antenatal booking: systematic review of controlled studies. Br Med J. 2005;330:565–7.

Article  Google Scholar 

O’Brien TE, Ray JG, Chan W-S. Maternal body mass index and the risk of preeclampsia: a systematic overview. Epidemiology. 2003;14:368–74.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Bartsch E, Medcalf KE, Park AL, Ray JG, Al-Rubaie ZTA, Askie LM, et al. Clinical risk factors for pre-eclampsia determined in early pregnancy: systematic review and meta-analysis of large cohort studies. BMJ. 2016;353.

Akolekar R, Syngelaki A, Poon L, Wright D, Nicolaides KH. Competing risks model in early screening for preeclampsia by biophysical and biochemical markers. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2013;33:8–15.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

MacDonald TM, Walker SP, Hannan NJ, Tong S, Kaitu’u-Lino TJ. Clinical tools and biomarkers to predict preeclampsia. eBioMedicine. 2022;75:103780. Available From: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2021.103780.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Al-Rubaie ZTA, Askie LM, Ray JG, Hudson HM, Lord SJ. The performance of risk prediction models for pre-eclampsia using routinely collected maternal characteristics and comparison with models that include specialised tests and with clinical guideline decision rules: a systematic review. BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016;123:1441–52.

Article  Google Scholar 

Riley RD, van der Windt D, Croft P, Moons KGM. Prognosis research in healthcare: concepts, methods, and impact. Oxford University Press; 2019.

Scazzocchio E, Crovetto F, Triunfo S, Gratacós E, Figueras F. Validation of a first-trimester screening model for pre-eclampsia in an unselected population. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49:188–93.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Tan MY, Syngelaki A, Poon LC, Rolnik DL, O’Gorman N, Delgado JL, et al. Screening for pre-eclampsia by maternal factors and biomarkers at 11–13 weeks’ gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;52:186–95.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Grobbee DE, Hoes AW. Clinical epidemiology: principles, methods, and applications for clinical research. Jones & Bartlett Publishers; 2014.

Steyerberg EW, Moons KGM, van der Windt DA, Hayden JA, Perel P, Schroter S, et al. Prognosis Research Strategy (PROGRESS) 3: prognostic model research. PLoS Med. 2013;10: e1001381.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Zhang A, Xing L, Zou J, Wu JC. Shifting machine learning for healthcare from development to deployment and from models to data. Nat Biomed Eng. 2022;6(12):1330–45.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25:44–56. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Yu KH, Beam AL, Kohane IS. Artificial intelligence in healthcare. Nat Biomed Eng. 2018;2:719–731. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-018-0305-z.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Leo B. Statistical modeling: the two cultures. Stat Sci. 2001;16:199–231.

Article  Google Scholar 

Halperin I. Qlbs: Q-learner in the black-scholes (-merton) worlds. J Deriv. 2020;28:99–122.

Article  Google Scholar 

Jordan MI, Mitchell TM. Machine learning: trends, perspectives, and prospects. Science. 2015;349:255–60.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Dahan H, Cohen S, Rokach L, Maimon O. Proactive data mining using decision trees. Proactive Data Min with Decis Trees. Springer. 2014. p. 21–33.

Goldstein BA, Navar AM, Carter RE. Moving beyond regression techniques in cardiovascular risk prediction: applying machine learning to address analytic challenges. Eur Hear J. 2017;38:1805–14.

Google Scholar 

Luo W, Phung D, Tran T, Gupta S, Rana S, Karmakar C. Guidelines for developing and reporting machine learning predictive models in biomedical research: a multidisciplinary view corresponding author. J Med INTERNET Res. 2016;18:1–10.

Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Beam AL, Kohane IS. Big data and machine learning in health care. JAMA. 2018;319:1317–8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Christodoulou E, Ma J, Collins GS, Steyerberg EW, Verbakel JY, Van Calster B. REVIEW A systematic review shows no performance benefit of machine learning over logistic regression for clinical prediction models. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019;110:12–22. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.02.004.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Song X, Liu X, Liu F, Wang C. Comparison of machine learning and logistic regression models in predicting acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Med Inform [Internet]. 2021;151. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2021.104484.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

De Kat AC, Hirst J, Woodward M, Kennedy S, Peters SA. Prediction models for preeclampsia: a systematic review. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2019;16:48–66.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Townsend R, Khalil A, Premakumar Y, Allotey J, Snell KIE, Chan C, et al. Prediction of pre-eclampsia: review of reviews. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;54:16–27.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Antwi E, Amoakoh-Coleman M, Vieira DL, Madhavaram S, Koram KA, Grobbee DE, et al. Systematic review of prediction models for gestational hypertension and preeclampsia. PLoS One [Internet]. 2020;15:1–24. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230955.

Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ [Internet]. 2021;372. Available from: http://www.prisma-statement.org/.

Debray TPA, Damen JAAG, Snell KIE, Ensor J, Hooft L, Reitsma JB, et al. A guide to systematic review and meta-analysis of prediction model performance. BMJ. 2017.

Dimitriadis E, Rolnik DL, Zhou W, Estrada-Gutierrez G, Koga K, Francisco RPV, et al. Pre-eclampsia. Nat Rev Dis Prim. 2023;9:1–22.

Google Scholar 

Enticott J, Buck K, Shawyer F. Finding, “hard to find” literature on hard to find groups: a novel technique to search grey literature on refugees and asylum seekers. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2018;27:1–7.

Article  Google Scholar 

Geersing GJ, Bouwmeester W, Zuithoff P, Spijker R, Leeflang M, Moons K. Search filters for finding prognostic and diagnostic prediction studies in medline to enhance systematic reviews. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:3–8.

Article  Google Scholar 

Covidence systematic review software, Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia. Available at.

Wolff RF, Moons KGM, Riley RD, Whiting PF, Westwood M, Collins GS, et al. PROBAST: a tool to assess the risk of bias and applicability of prediction model studies. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170:51–8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Moons KGM, de Groot JAH, Bouwmeester W, Vergouwe Y, Mallett S, Altman DG, et al. Critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies: the CHARMS checklist. PLoS Med. 2014;11(10):e1001744.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Hosmer Jr DW, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant RX. Applied logistic regression. John Wiley & Sons. 2013.

Steyerberg EW. Clinical prediction models: a practical approach to development, validation and updating. Biometrics. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01431.x.

Van Calster B, McLernon DJ, Van Smeden M, Wynants L, Steyerberg EW, Bossuyt P, et al. Calibration: the Achilles heel of predictive analytics. BMC Med. 2019;17:1–7.

Google Scholar 

• Liu M, Yang X, Chen G, Ding Y, Shi M, Sun L, et al. Development of a prediction model on preeclampsia using machine learning-based method: a retrospective cohort study in China. Front Physiol. 2022;13:1–9. This study showed that compared with other prediction algorithm approaches, the random forest algorithm showed better prediction performance with the highest accuracy in pre-eclampsia prediction.

Google Scholar 

• Li YX, Shen XP, Yang C, Cao ZZ, Du R, Yu MD, et al. Novel electronic health records applied for prediction of pre-eclampsia machine-learning algorithms. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2021;26:102–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preghy.2021.10.006. The study applied electronic health record data to predict pre-eclampsia and found that the extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) algorithm had excellent discrimination performance with the highest accuracy and precision.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Zhang X, Chen Y, Salerno S, Li Y, Zhou L, Zeng X, et al. Prediction of severe preeclampsia in machine learning. Med Nov Technol Devices. 2022;1(15):100158.

Article  Google Scholar